0t  tttf  ®6n>lO0ioj/  e 

PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


Presented  by  Dr.  F.  1 — PeAWn. 


BT  1101  .E18  1873 
Eaton,  John  Richard  Turner, 
1825- 

The  permanence  of 

1  *  .  *  •  t 

Hhri s t i an i t v 


J 


The  Permanence  of  Christianity 


His  ego  nec  metas  rerum,  nec  tempora  pono. 


' *  *  j  S.VY' 

The  Permanence  of 


Christianity 


CONSIDERED  IN  EIGHT  LECTURES 
PREACHED  BEFORE  THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  OXFORD  IN  THE 

YEAR  MDCCCLXXII 


0n  tlje  foundation  of  tlje  late  Iftetu  3|oljn  Bampton, 


BY 

JOHN  RICHARD  TURNER  EATON,  M.A. 

LATE  FELLOW  AND  TUTOR  OF  MERTON  COLLEGE  ;  RECTOR  OF  LAP  WORT  H,  WARWICKSHIRE  ; 
HONORARY  CANON  OF  WORCESTER  CATHEDRAL. 


JIMo  Pork 

POTT,  YOUNG,  &  CO. 

COOPER  UNION,  FOURTH  AVENUE 


MDCCCLXXIII 


‘  ‘  Etiam  quae  pro  Religione  dicimus,  cum  grandi  metu  et  disciplina 
dicere  debemus.” — Hit.  de  Tnn.  ccvii. 


TO  THE  RIGHT  REVEREND 

HENRY 

LORD  BISHOP  OF  WORCESTER 


THESE  LECTURES  ARE 

Detucateti 


WITH  SINCERE  RESPECT. 


■ 


EXTRACT 


PROM  THE  LAST  WILL  AND  TESTAMENT 

OF  THE  LATE 

REV.  JOHN  BAMPTON, 

CANON  OF  SALISBURY. 

- “  I  give  and  bequeath  my  Lands  and  Estates  to  the 

“  Chancellor,  Masters,  and  Scholars  of  the  LTniversity  of 
“  Oxford  for  ever,  to  have  and  to  hold  all  and  singular  the 
“  said  Lands  or  Estates  upon  trust,  and  to  the  intents  and 
“  purposes  hereinafter  mentioned ;  that  is  to  say,  I  will  and 
“  appoint  that  the  Vice-Chancellor  of  the  University  of 
“  Oxford  for  the  time  being  shall  take  and  receive  all  the 
“  rents,  issues,  and  profits  thereof,  and  (after  all  taxes,  repa- 
“  rations,  and  necessary  deductions  made)  that  he  pay  all  the 
“  remainder  to  the  endowment  of  eight  Divinity  Lecture 
“  Sermons,  to  be  established  for  ever  in  the  said  University, 
“  and  to  be  performed  in  the  manner  following : 

“  I  direct  and  appoint,  that,  upon  the  First  Tuesday  in 
“  Easter  Term,  a  Lecturer  may  be  yearly  chosen  by  the 
“  Heads  of  Colleges  only,  and  by  no  others,  in  the  room 
“  adjoining  to  the  Printing-House,  between  the  hours  of 
“  ten  in  the  morning  and  two  in  the  afternoon,  to  preach 
“  eight  Divinity  Lecture  Sermons,  the  year  following,  at 
“  St.  Mary’s  in  Oxford,  between  the  commencement  of  the 
“  last  month  in  Lent  Term,  and  the  end  of  the  third  week 
“  in  Act  Term. 


EXTRACT  FROM  CANON  HAMPTON’S  WILL. 


“  Also  I  direct  and  appoint,  that  the  eight  Divinity  Lecture 
“  Sermons  shall  be  preached  upon  either  of  the  following  sub- 
“  jects — to  confirm  and  establish  the  Christian  faith,  and  to 
“  confute  all  heretics  and  schismatics — upon  the  divine 
“  authority  of  the  holy  Scriptures — upon  the  authority  of 
“  the  writings  of  the  primitive  Fathers,  as  to  the  faith  and 
“  practice  of  the  primitive  Church — upon  the  Divinity  of  our 
“  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ — upon  the  Divinity  of  the 
“  Holy  Ghost — upon  the  Articles  of  the  Christian  Faith,  as 
“  comprehended  in  the  Apostles’  and  Nicene  Creed. 

“  Also  I  direct,  that  thirty  copies  of  the  eight  Divinity 
“  Lecture  Sermons  shall  be  always  printed,  within  two  months 
“  after  they  are  preached ;  and  one  copy  shall  be  given  to  the 
“  Chancellor  of  the  University,  and  one  copy  to  the  Head  of 
“  every  College,  and  one  copy  to  the  Mayor  of  the  city  of 
“  Oxford,  and  one  copy  to  be  put  into  the  Bodleian  Library ; 
“  and  the  expense  of  printing  them  shall  be  paid  out  of  the 
“  revenue  of  the  Land  or  Estates  given  for  establishing  the 
“  Divinity  Lecture  Sermons ;  and  the  Preacher  shall  not  be 
“  paid,  nor  be  entitled  to  the  revenue,  before  they  are  printed. 

“  Also  I  direct  and  appoint,  that  no  person  shall  be  quali- 
“  fied  to  preach  the  Divinity  Lecture  Sermons,  unless  he  hath 
“  taken  the  degree  of  Master  of  Arts  at  least,  in  one  of  the  two 
“Universities  of  Oxford  or  Cambridge;  and  that  the  same 
“  person  shall  never  preach  the  Divinity  Lecture  Sermons 
“  twice.” 


PREFACE 


T  AM  aware  that  all  advocacy  of  Revealed  Truth, 
which  does  not  proceed  from  the  pen  of  a  lay¬ 
man,  will  in  some  quarters,  at  least,  be  held  to  be 
but  prejudiced  and  valueless.  I  have  accordingly 
made  greater  use  throughout  this  work  of  the  state¬ 
ments  and  testimony  of  adversaries  than  of  friends 
to  the  cause  of  Christianity.  To  these  I  have  en¬ 
deavoured  to  do  justice,  “  setting  down  nought  in 
malice ;  but  rather  striving  to  make  my  own  the 
honest  professions  of  an  honoured  name  in  our 
Church ;  whose  words,  and  not  my  own,  I  desire 
may  linger  in  the  mind  of  the  reader  of  these 
pages.  “No  man  may  justly  blame  me  for  honour- 
“  ing  my  spiritual  mother,  the  Church  of  Eng- 
“  land,  in  whose  womb  I  was  conceived,  at  whose 
“  breasts  I  was  nourished,  and  in  whose  bosom  I 
“  hope  to  die.  Bees,  by  the  instinct  of  nature,  do 
“  love  ^eir  hives,  and  birds  their  nests.  But, 

(.Tod  is  my  witness,  that  according  to  my  utter- 

^  «/ 


Vlll 


PREFACE. 


“  most  talent  and  poor  understanding,  I  have  en- 
u  deavoured  to  set  down  the  naked  Truth  impar- 
“  tially,  without  either  favour  or  prejudice,  the 
u  two  capital  enemies  of  right  judgment.  The  one 
“  of  which,  like  a  false  mirrour,  doth  represent 
“  things  fairer  and  straighter  than  they  are ;  the 
44  other,  like  the  tongue  infected  with  choler,  makes 
44  the  sweetest  meats  to  taste  bitter.  My  desire 
44  hath  been  to  have  Truth  for  my  ehiefest  friend, 
44  and  no  enemy  hut  error.” — Bramhall  {Works, 
II.  21). 

I  should  be  ungrateful,  were  I  not  here  to  ac¬ 
knowledge  my  obligations  to  the  assistance  and 
sympathy  of  many  old  and  valued  friends,  more 
especially  to  the  Rev.  William  Ince,  Sub-Rector 
and  Tutor  of  Exeter  College,  Oxford ;  and  to  Dr. 
George  Rolleston,  Fellow  of  Merton  College,  and 
Linacre  Professor  of  Physiology  in  the  University 
of  Oxford. 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

IN  TROD  UC  TION . x  i 

LECTURE  I. 

PERMANENCE  A  TEST  OF  RELIGIOUS  SYSTEMS .  i 

LECTURE  II. 

OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY  CON¬ 
SIDERED  . 53 

LECTURE  III. 

OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY  CON¬ 
SIDERED  . in 

LECTURE  IV. 

OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY  CON¬ 
SIDERED  . 159 

LECTURE  V. 

OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY  CON¬ 
SIDERED  . 205 

LECTURE  VI. 

THE  PERMANENCE  OF  CHRISTIANITY  INFERRED  FROM  THE 
CHARACTER  OF  ITS  INFLUENCE . 251 


X 


CONTENTS. 


LECTURE  VII. 

PAGE 

THE  PERMANENCE  OF  CHRISTIANITY  INFERRED  FROM  THE 

CHARACTER  OF  ITS  INFLUENCE . 295 


LECTURE  VIII. 

THE  PERMANENCE  OF  CHRISTIANITY  INFERRED  FROM  ITS 
MISSIONARY  CHARACTER  AND  PRESENT  STANDING.  .  .  337 


IN  TROD  UCTION 


N  the  interval  between  the  delivery  of  these 
Lectures  and  their  publication  a  volume  has  ap¬ 
peared  from  the  pen  of  the  veteran,  D.  F.  Strauss, 
which  has  already  run  through  four  editions.1  No 
work  could  better  illustrate  the  double  line  of 
attack  to  which  Christian  belief  is  at  this  time 
exposed.  Commencing  with  the  inquiry, — “  Are 
we  still  Christians  ?  ”  and  taking  the  Apostles’ 
Creed  as  his  standard  of  orthodoxy,2  the  writer 
seeks  to  show  in  detail  not  only  the  unreality  of 
a  belief  in  the  Holy  Spirit;  not  only  the  unhis- 
torical  character  of  all  that  is  Divine  in  the  Person 
and  Life  of  J esus  Christ ;  but  further,  the  need¬ 
lessness  and  logical  imperfection  of  the  very  idea 
of  a  Creator  of  the  Universe.3  That  Universe,  he 
holds,  is  itself  both  the  term  of  human  inquiry  and 
the  basis  of  all  reality.  In  it  and  in  its  manifold 
developments  must  be  sought  the  ground  of  all 

1  Der  alte  und  der  neue  Glaube.  Vierte  Auflage.  Bonn,  1873. 

2  See  §§  5-13. 

See  more  particularly  §§  5,  36,  38.  It  was  a  saying  of  Kant,  “  Give 
me  Matter ;  and  I  will  show  you  how  a  world  might  from  it  arise.” 


Xll 


INTRO  D  UCTION 


existence,1  the  secret  of  life,  the  measure  of  eter¬ 
nity  and  of  infinity,  the  limitations  of  immortality. 
Duty  is  resolved  into  resignation  to  the  invariable 
Laws  of  Nature,  and  into  the  submission  of  indi¬ 
vidual  desires  to  the  general  good  of  the  race  or 
species.2  Religion,  if  indeed  it  can  be  said  to  exist, 
is  explained  to  be  a  sentiment  of  awe  and  admiration 
at  the  grandeur  of  that  Universe,3  of  which  the  par¬ 
ticular  soul,  if  that  can  be  called  soul,  which  is  so 
entirely  one  with  the  body,  forms  a  minute  fraction. 

Such  are  the  results  of  a  criticism  of  forty  years, 
hitherto  supposed  to  be  directed  to  the  examina¬ 
tion  of  the  historical  documents  relating  to  the 
Life  of  Christ.  It  has  closed  in  landing  the  critic 
not  in  the  position  of  the  Unitarian ;  who  denies, 
indeed,  the  cardinal  doctrine  of  our  Lord’s  Divinity, 

1  “  Im  Laufe  unsrer  weiteren  Betrachtimg  bestimmte  sich  uns  das- 
selbe  nalier  dabin,  dass  es  in’s  Unendlicbe  bewegter  Stoff  sei,  der  durch 
Scheidung  und  Mischung  sich  zu  imrner  hohern  Formen  und  Functionen 
steiger t,  wahrend  er  durch  Ausbilduug,  Riickbildung,  und  Neubildung 
einen  ewigen  Kreis  beschreibt.”— Strauss,  p.  226.  See  also  228. 

2  “  Alles  sittliche  Handeln  des  Menschen,  mochte  ich  sagen,  ist  ein 
Siclibestimmen  des  Einzelnen  nach  der  Idee  der  Gattung.” — lb.,  pp.  241 
and  243.  Strauss  of  course  denies  free-will,  p.  252. 

3  See  p.  244.  “  Das  religiose  Gebiet  in  der  menschlichen  Seele 

gleicht  dem  Gebiete  der  Rothhaute  in  Amerika,  das,  man  mag  es 
beklagen  oder  misbilligen  so  viel  man  will,  von  deren  weisshautigen 
Nachbam  von  Jahr  zu  Jahr,  mehr  eingeengt  wird;”  p.  141.  See  also 
145,  147.  Similarly  M.  Littre  on  the  side  of  Positivism  defines  Reli¬ 
gion,  “  La  definition  de  la  religion  c’est  l’ensemble  des  dogmes  et  d’in- 
stitutions  qui  conforment  a  la  conception  du  Monde  i  education  et  la 
morale.” — Paroles  de  la  Philosophie  Positive ,  p.  62.  As  regards  the 
old  theological  dogmas  he  declares  himself  superior  to  conviction. 
lb.,  pp.  50,  51. 


INTR  OD  UCTION. 


xm 


yet  acknowledges  “  the  form,”  and  even,  it  may  be 
said,  “  the  power  of  godliness :  ”  but  in  that  of  a 
Pantheistic  Materialist,1  indifferent  alike  to  the 
existence  of  Grod,  or  of  the  soul.2  Professing  to 
write  in  the  interests  of  a  powerful  and  intellectual 
minority,  Herr  Strauss  declares  his  readiness  to 
await  the  extinction  of  the  popular  religion,  the 
doctrines  of  which,  meanwhile,  he  hardly  thinks 
it  necessary  to  assail.3 

Now,  if  such  be,  indeed,  a  fair  representation  of 
the  issues  of  an  union  of  Biblical  Criticism  with 
Natural  Philosophy ;  it  will  appear  that  hencefor¬ 
ward  there  may  be  expected  a  new  line  of  attack 
upon  Eevealed  Truth,  the  result  of  a  junction  of 
the  forces  which  have  hitherto  been  ranged  on 

1  “  Wenn  man  hierin  den  klaren  crassen  Material ismus  ausgesprochen 
findet,  so  will  ich  zunachst  gar  nichts  dagegen  sagen,”  p.  212.  Strauss, 
however,  thinks  the  differences  between  the  Materialist  and  Idealist  of 
little  account.  He  prefers  a  system  of  Monism.  This  again  is  the 
view  of  the  Positivist  School.  See  Littre,  Principes ,  pp.  38,  39.  Strictly 
speaking,  however,  Pantheism  supposes  a  God  immanent  in  things ; 
while  Positivism  sees  only  Laws. 

2  “  Karl  Vogt  (er  ist  sonst  nicht  mein  Mann,  aber  in  diesem  Felde 
stimme  ich  ihm  durchaus  bei)  hat  den  Schluss  gezogen,  dass  die 
Annalime  einei  besoudern  Seelensubstanz  eine  reine  Plypothese  ist ; 
dass  keine  einzige  lhatsache  fiir  die  Existenz  einer  solcher  Substanz 
spricht.” — lb.,  p.  210.  Vogt,  it  is  well  known,  after  Cabanis,  makes 
Thought  a  secretion  of  the  brain.  See  his  Bilder  aus  dem  Thierltben. 

I  lii  uns  selbst  indessen  begehren  wir  von  diesen  Bewegungen 
vorerst  mehr  nicht  als  Diogenes  von  dem  grossen  Alexander.  Kami  ich 
nur  so  viel  dass  uns  der  Kirchenschatten  fortan  nicht  mehr  im  Wege 
se**  'Ib-t  P*  296.  See  also  pp.  7,  8,  15,  75.  In  his  Nachwort  cds 
Vorwort ,  Strauss  quotes  a  very  true  observation  of  Dahlmann :  “  Wie 

man  eine  Kiiche  auf  bios  Christlicher  Moral  bauen  konne,  das  sehe  ich 
vor  der  Hand  nicht  ein  :  ”  p.  41. 


XIV 


INTR  OD  UCTION 


different  sides  against  the  cause  of  Christianity. 
While,  on  the  one  hand,  criticism  is  being  directed, 
legitimately  and  not  unfairly,  upon  the  original 
documents  of  our  Faith,  the  trust-deeds  of  the 
Gospel ;  on  the  other,  arguments  are  advanced, 
presumably  the  products  of  scientific  research ; 
which  are  fatal  to  the  Christian  scheme,  it  is  true, 
hut  also  to  the  very  existence  of  Religion  gene¬ 
rally. 

Hence  the  twofold  character  of  the  line  of 
proof  pursued  in  these  Lectures,  involving  con¬ 
siderations  which  may  be  said  to  lie  at  the  roots 
of  all  faith  in  God  and  Eternal  Life,  as  well  as  an 
examination  of  facts  which  concern  the  history 
and  prospects  of  Christianity.  Both,  indeed,  are 
connected  by  the  reflection  that  the  Religion  of 
Christ,  if  it  is  to  be  a  permanent  gift  to  mankind, 
must  first  be  found  superior  to  all  objections  raised 
by  the  free-thinking  efforts  of  the  age.  It  must 
show  itself  as  ready  to  assimilate  with  scientific 
culture  as  with  the  barbarism  of  ruder  times. 

The  position  of  the  foregoing  school  of  thought, 
as  regards  the  main  tenets  of  Positivism,  is  not  far 
to  seek.  Both  equally  exclude  the  Supernatural 
from  History  and  from  the  Universe.1  Both  alike 

1  “  Du  moment  qu’on  ne  laisse  aucime  place  aux  volontes  surnatu- 
relles,  ni  dans  le  monde  inorganique  ni  dans  le  monde  organique,  ni 
parnii  les  phenom&nes  cosmiques  ni  parmi  ceux  de  l’liistoire,  on  est 
necessairement  des  notres.” — Littre,  Paroles  de  la  Phil.  Positive ,  p.  58. 
Comp.  Strauss,  p.  181. 


I  NT R  on  UCTIO N. 


xv 


find  in  the  Universe  only  Matter  and  Force,1  neg¬ 
lecting  the  idea  of  Form.2  Both  hold  that  to  seek 
the  reason  of  things  in  the  thought  of  God  is  to 
seek  it  in  a  region  which  is  both  practically  and 
mentally  inaccessible.  Thus  it  is  this  attempt 
which  has  constituted  the  whole  history  of  Meta¬ 
physic  and  Religion  ;  a  history  of  failure.  Both 
agree  in  banishing  free  agency  from  human  life 
and  conduct.3  Both  in  the  study  of  things  omit 
the  study  of  man ;  forgetting  the  difficulty,  if  not 
impossibility,  of  establishing  on  inatevicd  grounds 
alone  the  ideas  of  God,  of  immortality,  of  our  own 
individual  personality.4  Both  alike  confound  the 

Au  dela  de  ces  deux  termes,  Matiere  et  Force,  la  science  positive 
ne  connait  rien.”— Littre,  Principes,  p.  xi.  “La  force,”  says  M.  Janet 
(Pe  Materialisme  Contemporain ,  p.  20),  “  selon  Moleschott  n’est  pas  un 
Dieu  donnant  l’impulsion  4  la  mature ;  line  force  qui  plane  au  dessus 
de  la  matiere  est  une  idee  absurde.”  Moleschott’s  ground-principle  is, 

“  No  force  without  matter;  no  matter  without  force ;  ”  =  Allgewalt  des 
Stoffenwechsels. 

Cette  idee  de  l’espece  qui  serait  inherente  au  germe  c’est  un 
pi  incipe  qui  depasse  toutes  les  donnees  du  Materialisme  ” — Janet 
p.  115.  1  ’ 

Ihus  the  old  antithesis  between  Predestination  and  Free-will  is 
now  represented  by  Naturalism  and  Religion,  Laws  of  Nature  and 
Human  Liberty.  We  may  be  content  to  rest  in  Dr.  Mozley’s  con¬ 
clusion  (Augustinian  Doctrine  of  Predestination ,  I.  20),  “  While  suffi¬ 
ciently  clear  for  all  purposes  of  practical  religion  (for  we  cannot  doubt 
that  they  are  truths  so  far  as  and  in  that  mode  in  which  we  apprehend 
them),  these  are  truths  upon  which  we  cannot  raise  definite  and  abso¬ 
lute  systems.  All  we  build  upon  either  must  partake  of  the  imperfect 
nature  of  the  premiss  which  supports  it,  and  be  held  under  a  reserve  of 

consistency  with  a  counter  conclusion  from  the  opposite  truth  ” _ See 

also  IV.,  326. 

4  M.  Janet  well  observes :  “  Le  Positivisme  c’est  le  revanche  de  l’em- 
pirisme  contre  la  phrenesie  de  la  speculation  rationnelle  a  priori .” 


XVI 


INTR  OD  UCTI  ON. 


indestructibility  of  Matter  and  the  Conservation  of 
Force  with  its  eternity.1  Both  equally  ignore  the 
real  difficulty  of  Naturalism  ;  which  is  to  recon¬ 
cile  the  consciousness  of  personal  identity  with  the 
ceaseless  permutations  of  a  material  world.  How 
can  we  prove,  or  even  conceive,  a  community  of 
consciousness  between  two  particles  of  matter  ?2 

In  our  own  country  a  school  of  thought  is 
arising,  perhaps  more  logical  and  certainly  more 
reverent  than  that  of  pure  Materialism,  which  re¬ 
cognizes  in  the  Unknowable  the  ultimate  limit  of 
Science,  but  also  the  proper  object  of  Religion. 
Such  a  view,  amid  the  turmoil  of  discussion,  is  the 
rather  welcome  to  the  Christian  believer ;  as  he  is 
himself  ready  to  see  and  admit  Religion  to  be  the 
Revelation  of  the  Unknowable  or  Unknown.  It 
has,  however,  its  dangers  and  its  doubts ;  as  to 
which  it  is  well  for  the  younger  student  of  our 
time  to  be  on  his  guard.  A  system,  in  which  the 

1  “  Jadis  la  raison  humaine  le  voyant  sujet  an  changement,  alia 
chercher  l’eternel,  l’immuable  par  dela  l’horizon  et  dans  les  archetypes. 
Maintenant  l’eternel,  l’immuable,  devenant  notion  positive,  nous  apparait 
sous  la  forme  des  lois  immanentes  qui  gouvernent  tout.” — Littre,  Prin- 
cipes ,  p.  57. 

2  “  He,  this  person,  or  self,  must  either  he  a  substance,  or  the  pro¬ 
perty  of  some  substance.  If  he,  if  person,  be  a  substance,  then  con¬ 
sciousness  that  he  is  the  same  person  is  consciousness  that  he  is  the 
same  substance.  If  the  person,  or  he,  be  the  property  of  a  substance, 
still  consciousness  that  he  is  the  same  property  is  as  certain  a  proof 
that  his  substance  remains  the  same,  as  consciousness  that  he  remains 
the  same  substance  would  be :  since  the  same  property  cannot  he  trans¬ 
ferred  from  one  substance  to  another — Bp.  Butler,  Dissert.  I.  on  Per¬ 
sonal  Identity. 


INTRO  D  UCTION. 


XVII 


Unknowable,  as  such ,  is  made  the  essential  object- 
matter  of  Faith,  excludes  the  possibility  of  the 
Unknowable  becoming  known  and  determined, 
whether  mediately  through  Revelation,  or  ulti¬ 
mately  in  the  history  of  things.  In  such  a  view 
a  confusion  seems  for  ever  imminent  between  the 
physical  Unknown  in  the  realm  of  Nature,  and  the 
mentally  Unknowable  which  constitutes  the  prac¬ 
tical  principle  of  Religion.  Still  more  difficult  is 
it  to  reconcile  this  doctrine  of  a  Naturalistic  Ne¬ 
science  with  the  aspect  under  which  it  is  very 
frequently  presented,  as  “  the  Power  manifested  in 
the  Universe.” 

The  argument  pursued  in  Lecture  II.  (as  bind¬ 
ing  in  the  sphere  of  physical  philosophy *),  so  far 
forth  as  it  presumes  Motion,  as  well  as  Form,  to 
necessitate  a  First  Cause,  will  be  found  in  Aris¬ 
totle’s  Physics ,  Lib.  VIII.  It  must,  as  it  seems 
to  me,  hold  go.od  till  it  can  be  shown  that  Motion 
is  an  original,  primary  quality  of  Matter,  and 
so  immanent  in  it.  But,  as  far  as  appears, 
Inertia  is  as  much  a  quality  of  Matter  as  Motion, 
and  a  body  at  rest  must  be  acted  on  exter¬ 
nally  to  be  set  in  movement.  The  Wolfian  sup¬ 
position  of  a  tendency  to  motion  (in  nisu )  was 
demonstrated  by  Euler  to  be  both  unphilosophical 

1  On  the  necessity  or  at  least  desirability  of  admitting  a  physical 
element  into  Philosophy,  comp.  Janet,  La  Crise  Philosophise,  p.  106, 
of  whose  able  train  of  reasoning  I  have  gladly  availed  myself  in  the 
following  remarks. — See  Le  Materialisme  Contemporain ,  c.  iv. 

b 


XV111 


INTRO D  UCTION 


and  contrary  to  experience.  In  point  of  fact,  all 
movement  is  now  regarded  and  computed  as  a  re¬ 
sultant  ;  and  whereas  the  rate  of  velocity  might  at 
first  sight  appear  to  he  in  the  body,  it  is  found  in 
effect  to  be  otherwise.  Attraction  and  Inertia  are 
equally  facts  ;  but  if  the  former  be  considered  to 
be  a  relative  property  of  two  atoms  of  matter, 
which  singly  are  indifferent  to  rest  or  motion,  this 
is  a  property  which  has  still  to  be  accounted  for. 
Nor  can  a  universe,  however  immense,1  have  pro¬ 
perties  other  than  those  of  its  integrant  parts. 

One  fact,  as  it  seems  to  me,  must  ever  remain  a 
stumbling-block  in  the  path  of  infidel  speculation. 
It  is  the  existence,  history,  and  standing  of  the 
Church  of  Christ.2  Active,  influential,  progres¬ 
sive ;  nurse  of  the  brightest  minds  that  shine  in 
the  galaxy  of  human  story,  of  an  Origen,  an  Au¬ 
gustine,  a  Dante,  a  Pascal,  a  Leibnitz,  a  Milton,  a 
Newton ;  handmaid  to  the  spirit  of  man  in  his 
moments  of  loftiest  devotion ;  mother  of  modern 
art ;  queen  of  the  realm  of  benevolence  and  huma¬ 
nity  ;  her  doctrines  can  never  be  held  akin  to 

1  On  the  acknowledged  immensity  of  the  Universe,  M.  Littre  finely 
observes :  “  C’est  un  ocean  qui  vient  battre  notre  rive ;  et  pour  lequel 
nous  n’avons  ni  barque  ni  voile ;  mais  dont  la  claire  vision  est  aussi 
salutaire  que  formidable.”— A.  Comte  et  la  Phil.  Pos .,  p.  529. 

2  Thus  it  is  admitted  by  Strauss  ( Nachwort ,  pp.  37,  38),  “  dass  die 
von  Jesus  ausgegangene  religiose  Bewegung  noch  machtig  in  unsre  Zeit 

hereinwirke,  wird  Niemand  laugnen . Christenthum  mag  in 

der  Menschheit  gewirkt  haben  was  es  will,  und  fortwirken  wird  es  in 
jedem  Fall :  &c.” 


I  NTS.  ON  UCTION.  x ;  x 

Pagan  or  Oriental  superstitions,  or  be  deemed  un¬ 
worthy  of  modern  intelligence:  neither  can  they 
he  explained  away,  as  the  unripe  fruit  of  human 
evolution,  or  as  the  outcome  of  times  of  unreason- 
mg  ignorance.  If  only  we  apply  to  Christianity, 
as  a  phenomenon  of  man’s  history  in  the  world, 
the  same  standard  of  estimation  which  we  use  in 
other  things,  and  judge  of  its  future  by  the  past, 
there  is  small  reason  either  to  fear  as  to  its  per¬ 
petuity,  or  to  predict  its  fall. 


LECTURE  I. 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST  OF  RELIGIOUS  SYSTEMS. 


Afxep at  8  €7TlAoL7TOL  {ACLpTVp€S  O"0<fiu)T0LTOL. 


Pindar. 


LECTURE  I. 


“  Heaven  and  earth  shall  pass  away,  but  My  words  shall  not 
pass  away.”— jTTatt.  xxtb.  34. 


§  !• 


u  r 


T^RUTH,”  says  S.  Augustine,  “is  the 
daughter  of  Time.”1  The  weight  of 
prescription  in  the  balance  of  proof  rests  rather 
with  the  era  in  which  we  live  than  with  antiquity, 
however  hoary.  For,  in  comparison  with  earlier 
ages,  it  is  of  our  own  days  only  that  it  is  true  that 
“  the  world  hath  lost  his  youth  and  the  times  begin 
to  wax  old.”2  The  argument  from  authority  has 
thus  been  of  little  avail  in  the  departments  of 
general  knowledge  either  to  arrest  or  to  control 
progress.3  In  the  region  of  religious  truth  its  com¬ 
petence,  has  been  more  often  admitted  upon  special 

1  So  Bacon,  Nov.  Org.,  I.  Aph.  lxxxiv. :  “  Recte  enim  Veritas  Temporis 
filia  dicitur,  non  Authoritatis  ” ;  and  De  Augm.,  I.  458  (ed.  Spedding)  : 
“  Qu&  in  re  Temporis  filiae  malfc  patrissant.” 

2  2  Esdras,  xiv.  10. 

3  The  reason  is  admirably  stated  by  Pascal :  “  Les  secrets  de  la  nature 
sont  caches :  quoiqu’elle  agisse  toujours,  on  ne  decouvre  pas  toujours  ses 
effets  :  le  temps  les  revele  d’age  en  &ge,  et  quoique  toujours  egale  en  elle- 
meme,  elle  n’est  pas  toujours  egalement  connue.  Les  experiences,  qui 
nous  en  donnent  l’intelligence,  multiplient  continuellement ;  et,  comme 
elles  sont  les  seuls  principes  de  la  physique,  les  consequences  multiplient 
a  proportion.  C’est  de  cette  fapon  que  l’on  peut  aujourd’hui  prendre 
d’autres  sentiments  et  de  nouvelles  opinions  sans  mepriser  les  anciens 
et  sans  ingratitude ;  puisque  les  premieres  connaissances  qu’ils  nous  ont 
donnees,  ont  servi  de  degr6s  aux  notres,  et  que  dans  ces  avantages  nous 
leur  sommes  redevables  del’ascendanl  que  nous  avons  sur  eux.” — Pensees , 
I.  90  (ed.  Fangkre). 


Subject 

stated. 


The  argu¬ 
ment  from 
prescrip¬ 
tion  now 
only  ap¬ 
plicable. 


4 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST 


[Lect.  I. 


grounds,  into  which  it  does  not  concern  me  here 
to  enter.  It  was  used  at  the  first,  as  might  he 
expected,  against  Christianity  and  not  in  favour 
of  it.1  I  would  rather  remind  you  that,  though  in 
the  hour  of  doubt  and  perplexity  we  may  sigh  after 
that  nearness  to  Apostolic  tradition  which  was  the 
heritage  of  the  first  ages  of  the  Church,  and  cry 
with  Plato,  “  They  of  old  time  dwelt  more  nigh 
to  Grod” ; 2  yet  is  there  a  counter-advantage  in  our 
remoteness  from  the  beginning  of  the  faith  which 
it  is  the  purpose  of  these  Lectures  to  work  out. 
Religions,  it  must  be  admitted,  are  perishable. 

Age  to  age  succeeds, 

Blowing  a  noise  of  tongues  and  deeds, 

A  dust  of  systems  and  of  creeds. 

It  has  been  asserted,  though  no  doubt  question¬ 
ably,  that  there  is  no  country  except  India  which 
has  the  same  religion  now  which  it  had  at  the 
birth  of  Christ.3  Before  the  event  no  one  could 
appeal  to  experience  as  an  evidence  of  the  power 
or  genius  of  Christianity.  Numberless  objections 
can  be  imagined  which  might  have  been  raised  to 
its  success.  Apparent  impossibilities  might  very 


1  “  Quanto  venerabilius  ac  melius  antistitem  veritatis  majorum  exci- 
pere  disciplinam  ?  religiones  traditas  colere?”  Minucius  F.,  Octav ., 
cap.  v. ;  and  Lactantius,  Div.  Inst .,  II.  vii. :  “  Tanta  est  auctoritas 
vetustatis  ut  inquirere  in  earn  scelus  esse  dicatur.” 

2  Ot  pi v  Trakaioi ,  Kpelrroves  rjpcov  Kai  eyyvrepa)  QeHov  oIkovvtcs. 
Philcb .,  16  c. ;  cf.  Cic.,  Legg .,  II.  xi.  :  “  Antiquitas  proxime  accedit  ad 
Deos.” 

3  See  Draper,  History  of  Intellectual  Development  in  Europe }  i.  63. 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIOUS  SYSTEMS. 


5 


easily  have  been  alleged.  But  eighteen  hundred 
years  have  passed  and  the  faith  of  Christ  is  still 
a  power  in  the  world.  “  After  a  revolution,”  says 
Gibbon,1  “of  thirteen  or  fourteen  centuries,  that 
religion  is  still  professed  by  the  nations  of  Europe, 
the  most  distinguished  portion  of  human  kind  in 
arts  and  learning  as  well  as  in  arms.”  “Its  chief 
home  is  still  in  the  bosom  of  enterprise,  wealth, 
science,  and  civilization,  and  it  is  at  this  moment 
most  powerful  amongst  the  nations  that  have  most 
of  these.” 2  If  on  the  wane  it  is  still  vigorous.3 
But  is  it  on  the  wane  ?  And  in  its  collision  with 
the  “  elements  of  the  world,”  with  political  power, 
national  temperament,  antecedent  tradition,  philo¬ 
sophical  antagonism,  with  moral  and  physical 
limitations  of  whatever  kind,  has  it  suffered  on  the 
way  ?  “  The  fishermen  of  Grennesaret,”  it  has 


1  Yol.  II.,  p.  151,  ed.  Milman. 

2  Rogers,  Essays,  ii.  343.  In  this  view  Christendom  represents  what 
Comte  l Phil .  Pos.,  v.  7)  calls  “  V elite  de  Vhumanitefl  This  fact  must  be 
admitted  to  carry  weight  in  the  argument  from  development.  Et 
pev  yap  tcl  avorjTa  wpeyero  avrcov,  rjv  av  tl  to  Xeyopevov,  el  8e  Kai  ra 
(fipovLpa,  Trees  \eyoiev  av  tl  ;  Arist.,  N.  Eth.,  X.  ii.  4.  Christianity,  says 
Dr.  Mozley  ( Bampton  Lectures ,  p.  27),  “  is  the  religion  of  the  civilized 
world.  .  .  .  This  is  a  great  result — the  establishment  and  the  con¬ 
tinuance  of  a  religion  in  the  world — as  the  religion  too  of  the  intelligent 
as  well  as  of  the  simpler  portion  of  society.”  “  Christendom  includes 
the  entire  civilized  world,  that  is  to  say,  all  nations  whose  agreement 
on  a  matter  of  opinion  has  any  real  weight  or  authority.” — Sir  G. 
Cornewall  Lewis,  Influence  of  Authority,  p.  69. 

3  “  What  the  Church  has  lost  in  her  appeal  to  the  imagination  she 
has  gained  in  philosophical  cogency  by  the  evidence  of  her  persistent 
vitality.  She  is  as  vigorous  in  her  age  as  in  her  youth,  and  has 
upon  her  primd  facie  signs  of  divinity.” — Dr.  Newman,  Grammar  of 
Assent ,  425,  6. 


6 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST  [Lect.  I. 


been  picturesquely  said,  a  planted  Christianity,  and 
many  a  winter  and  many  a  summer  have  since 
rolled  over  it.  More  than  once  it  has  shed  its 


This  line 
of  proof 
inductive 
and  ap¬ 
peals  to 
facts. 


leaves  and  seemed  to  be  dying ;  and  when  the 
buds  burst  again,  the  colour  of  the  foliage  was 
changed.” 1  Something  it  may,  perhaps  must, 
have  parted  with ;  something  gained :  to  what 
extent,  and  in  what  directions  ?  Such  are  some 
of  the  thoughts  or,  it  may  be  said,  admissions 
which  crowd  upon  the  mind  in  approaching  the 
subject  of  the  present  Lectures — the  steadfastness 
of  Christianity  an  argument  for  the  truth  and 
ultimate  permanence  of  its  doctrines.2 

§  2.  Such  an  argument,  it  may  be  permitted  to 
point  out,  is  drawn  from  experience  and  is  an 
appeal  to  the  logic  of  facts.  In  this  respect  it  is 
perhaps  suited  to  the  bias  of  the  English  mind, 
and  certainly  falls  in  with  the  intellectual  temper 
of  the  time.  For  what  is  called  the  spirit  of  the 

1  Fronde,  Short  Studies,  Series  II.,  p.  32.  Thus  Pascal,  Pensees,  II.  200 
(ed.  Faugere) :  “  II  est  venu  enfin  en  la  consoinmation  des  temps,  et 
depuis  on  a  vu  naitre  tant  de  schismes  et  d’heresies,  tant  renverser 
d’etats,  tant  de  changements  en  toutes  choses  ;  et  cette  ]5glise  qui  adore 
Celui  qui  a  toujours  ete  adore,  a  subsiste  sans  interruption.  Et  ce  qui 
est  admirable,  incomparable,  et  tout  h  fait  divin,  est  que  cette  religion 
qui  a  toujours  dure,  a  toujours  ete  combattue.  Mille  fois  elle  a  ete  a  la 
veille  d’une  destruction  universelle,  et  toutes  les  fois  qu’elle  a  ete  en  cet 
etat,  Dieu  l’a  relevee  par  des  coups  extraordinaires  de  sa  puissance.” 
Mr.  Buckle  (Hist.  Civ.,  II.  285)  assumes,  for  he  does  not  go  into  proofs, 
that  Christianity  has  been  affected  by  foreign  events  contrary  to  the 
original  scheme. 

2  “  Nulle  autre  religion  n’a  la  perpetuite  ;  qui  est  la  principale  marque 

de  la  veritable.” — Pascal,  Pensees,  II.  368.  “  Lcs  trois  marques  de  la 

religion  sont  la  perpetuite,  la  bonne  vie,  les  miracles.” — lb. 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIOUS  SYSTEMS. 


7 


age  is  unmistakably  inductive :  and  by  the  in¬ 
ductive  spirit  is  really  intended  a  mental  disposi¬ 
tion  to  rest  upon  observed  facts  or  repetitions  of 
fact,  not  upon  any  inherent  necessity  of  sequence 
or  prior  proof.  There  would  seem  to  be  three 
main  roads  open  to  mankind  for  reaching  a  know¬ 
ledge  of  God,  of  our  duties  towards  Him,  and  of 
His  will  respecting  us.  These  are  our  own  nature 
and  constitution,  the  testimony  of  mankind,  and 
the  course  of  the  world’s  history.1  Of  these,  the 
last,  as  being  the  most  matter  of  fact,  would 
probably  in  the  present  day  be  held  to  be  the 
least  disputable.  The  results  of  a  religious  system 
furnish  at  least  an  indirect  proof  of  its  truth. 
Taken  in  connection  with  prophecy,  this  proof 
becomes  unanswerable ;  but  it  has  also  a  value  and 
importance  of  its  own.  Such  accordingly,  as 
regards  the  fortunes  of  the  Roman  Empire,  an 
epitome  of  the  history  of  the  world,  was  the 
motive  of  Augustine’s  masterpiece  of  Christian 
Apology,  the  Civitas  Dei.2  There  is  equal  reason 

1  See  Dr.  Newman,  Grammar  of  Assent ,  p.  384. 

2  Dr.  Mozley,  Bampton  Lectures ,  p.  263,  points  out  that  Augustine 
pushes  this  argument  almost  to  the  exclusion  of  miracles,  e.  g.  Civ.  Dei , 
xxii.  5 :  “  hoc  nobis  unum  grande  miraculum  sufficit,  quod  earn  ter- 
rarum  orbis  sine  ullis  miraculis  credidit.”  This  is  no  doubt  rhetorically 
expressed.  Elsewhere  he  states  the  proper  relation  of  miracles  to  the 
spread  of  Christianity.  “  Ergo  Ille  afferens  medicinam  qua?  corruptis- 
simos  mores  sanatura  esset,  miraculis  conciliavit  auctoritatem,  aucto- 
ritate  meruit  fidem,  fide  contraxit  multitudinem,  multitudine  obtinuit 
vetustatem,  vetustate  roboravit  religionem.” — De  Util.  Cred.,c.  xiv.,  and 
cf.  De  Ver.  Eel.,  c.  iii.,  xxv.  Thus  he  rests  his  faith  on  the  traditional 


8 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST  [Lect.  I. 


Possible 
only  after 
a  lapse  of 
centuries. 


for  its  being  the  ground  of  Christian  defence  now. 
No  analysis  of  modern  civilization  can  omit  to 
consider  the  influences  of  Christianity.  A  test  is 
thus  supplied  of  its  tendencies,  its  character,  and 
its  efficacy.1 

§  3.  It  is  with  the  field  of  time  as  with  areas  of 
mensurable  space.  A  certain  remoteness  from  the 
object  viewed  is  necessary  to  clear  and  distinct 
vision.  Still  more  necessary  is  it  for  any  purpose 
of  determining  the  relative  magnitude  and  actual 
proportions  of  the  thing  perceived.  These  can  be 
understood  only  by  the  medium  of  intervening 
objects.  The  same  holds  good  in  any  mental 


reception  of  Christianity.  “  Nullis  me  video  credidisse  nisi  populomm 
atque  gentium  confirmatas  opinioni  ac  fames  admodum  celeberrima3 :  hos 
autem  populos  Ecclesias  Catholicas  mysteria  usquequaque  occupasse.  .  . 
Credidi,  ut  dixi,  famas  celebritate,  consensione,  vetustate  roboratas.” — lb. 
Thus  antiquity  and  universality  of  reception  gradually  take  the  place  of 
miracles.  Cf.  also  De  Ver.  Bel .,  vii.  13  :  “  Hujus  religionis  sectandze 
caput  est  historia  et  prophetia  dispensationis  temporalis  divinas  provi- 
dentias  pro  salute  generis  humani  in  asternam  vitam  reformandi  atque 
reparandi.”  The  germs  of  Augustine’s  argument  in  the  Civitas  Dei 
will  be  found  in  Tertullian,  Apol .,  cap.  xl.  At  that  time  the  power  of 
the  Gods  was  estimated  by  the  condition  of  the  nations  who  worshipped 
them.  Cf.  Gieseler,  Ch.  Hist.,  I.  §  16. 

1  “  All  that  we  call  modern  civilization  in  a  sense  which  deserves 
the  name,  is  the  visible  expression  of  the  transforming  power  of  the 
Gospel.” — Froude,  Short  Studies ,  II.  p.  39.  “Christianity,”  writes 
Mr.  Lecky,  “  the  life  of  morality,  the  basis  of  civilization,  has  regene¬ 
rated  the  world.”  Montesquieu  ( Esprit  des  Lois ,  XXIV.)  recognizes 
this  argument.  “Comme  on  peut  juger  parmi  les  tenebres  celles  qui 
sont  les  moins  epaisses,  et  parmi  les  abymes  ceux  qui  sont  les  moins 
profonds,  ainsi  l’on  peut  chercher  entre  les  religions  fausses  celles  qui 
sont  les  plus  conformes  au  bien  de  la  socie'te ;  celles  qui,  quoiqu’elles 
n’aient  pas  1’effet  de  mener  les  homines  aux  felicites  de  l’autre  vie, 
peuvent  le  plus  contribuer  h  leur  bonheur  dans  celle-ci.” 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIOUS  SYSTEMS. 


9 


survey  of  the  past,  when  we  take  stock,  as  it  were, 
of  the  phenomena  of  history.  Only  after  the 
lapse  of  centuries  does  it  become  possible  to 
estimate  the  association  and  import  of  facts,  the 
tendency  of  principles,  their  falseness  or  their 
truth. 

The  thoughts  of  men  are  widened  by  the  process  of  the  suns. 

Christianity  is  at  this  time  a  fact  of  long  stand¬ 
ing.  Its  relative  importance  among  other  ele¬ 
ments  of  civilization  may  now  he  measured :  its 
effects  eliminated  from  those  of  other  agencies :  the 
laws  of  its  progress  determined :  its  retardations 
adjusted :  its  ultimate  movements  conjectured. 
But  there  was  a  time  when  these  processes  could 
not  have  been  carried  on,  when  any  argument 
grounded  on  them  would  have  been  preposterous  : 
and  the  more  nearly  we  return  in  thought  to  the 
beginnings  of  the  Faith  of  Christ,  the  less  room  is 
found  for  their  admission. 

The  religion  of  Jesus  Christ,  we  may  maintain, 
has  now  achieved  for  itself  an  actual  positive  stand¬ 
point  against  the  assaults  of  detractors.  Those 
who  impugn  its  claims  have  at  least  to  account  in 
some  other  way  for  the  successes  it  has  gained  and 
the  influence  which  it  wields.  Men,  it  may  he 
allowed,  may  blunder  into  truth :  perhaps  even, 
they  must  go  wrong  before  they  come  out  right. 
It  is  probable  that  this  is  the  key  to  much  of  the 


The  pro¬ 
gress  of 
Truth  slow 
but  inevit¬ 
able. 


10 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST  [Lect.  L 


history  of  thought,  resembling  those  arithmetical 
calculations  in  which  error  is  checked  by  error  to 
obtain  an  approximation  to  the  truth.1  But  the 
mind  on  looking  back  can  well  enough  discern  its 
wanderings  on  the  road.  It  is  true  that  there 
is  much  in  the  career  of  Christianity  to  obscure 
the  light  of  its  own  progress.  The  tardiness  and 
partial  character  of  its  advance  have  been  often 
remarked.2  It  has  not  flashed  with  meteor  bril¬ 
liancy  across  the  world’s  story,  neither  has  it 
shone  with  steady  undimmed  effulgence  along  the 
track  of  time ;  rather,  like  the  sun  in  heaven,  it 
has  struggled  through  cloud  and  mist.  At  the 
first  it  wrought  irregularly  on  individual  minds, 
not  by  an  organized  system.  The  Reformation 
and  all  returns  to  its  primitive  character  have 

1  Thus  “error,”  as  Voltaire  remarked,  “has  its  merits.”  “The 
history  of  philosophy,”  says  Sir  William  Hamilton,  “is  the  history  of 
error.”  We  may  say  with  Virgil, 

Pater  Ipse  colendi 
Haud  facilem  esse  viam  voluit. 

“  Encore  que  les  philosophes,”  says  Bossuet,  “  soient  les  protecteurs  de 
l’erreur,  toutefois  ils  ont  frappe  a  la  porte  de  la  Verite.” 

2  See  some  good  remarks  on  this  subject  by  the  Bishop  of  Ely  in  his 
lecture  on  Christ's  Influence  on  History ,  p.  28.  Thus  Neander  com¬ 
pares  the  development  of  Christianity  to  a  process  moving  steadily 
onward,  though  not  in  a  direct  line,  but  through  various  windings,  yet 
in  the  end  furthered  by  whatever  has  attempted  to  arrest  its  course. 
“Beligion,”  says  Mr.  Morley,  Crit.  Misc .,  p.  95,  “must  be  accepted  as 
a  fact  in  the  history  of  the  human  mind,  .  .  .  and  Christianity  is  unde¬ 
niably  entitled  to  one  of  the  most  important  places  in  it,  however  we 
may  be  disposed  to  strike  the  balance  between  the  undoubted  injuries 
and  the  undoubted  advantages  which  it  has  been  the  means  of  dealing 
to  the  civilization  of  the  West.” 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIO  US  S  YSTEMS.  1 1 

tended  to  restore  this  mode  of  its  operation,1  and 
so  have  ever  exhibited  degrees  of  non-conformity. 

The  irony  of  the  lofty  author  of  the  4  Variations  of 
Protestantism  ’  may  be  and  has  been  turned  with  tion  drawn 
equal  force  from  the  disagreements  of  opposed  ations  of 

belief 

sects  and  rival  Churches  upon  the  claims  of  Chris¬ 
tianity  at  large.2  The  conclusion  drawn,  it  is  true, 
is  no  more  valid  in  the  one  case  than  in  the  other, 
and  for  the  same  reasons.  Indeed,  to  a  fair  mind 
it  would  rather  furnish  a  presumption  against  the 
truth  of  Christianity,  if  it  did  not  or  had  not  in  its 
progress  exhibited  that  amount  of  variation  which 
is  alone  compatible  with  the  course  of  human 
reason  on  all  subjects  of  thought.  The  pathology 
of  a  religious  system  assumes  the  reality  of  a  true 
core  of  belief.  The  existence  of  controversy  is  to 
a  certain  extent  a  test  of  the  power  and  vitality  of 
Christianity.  44  If  any  country,”  says  Bacon,3 
“  decline  into  Atheism,  then  controversies  wax 
dainty;  because  men  do  think  religion  scarce 
worth  the  falling  out.”  The  co-existence  and  com¬ 
petition  of  sects  has  therefore  not  unreasonably 

1  Dean  Hook,  Lives  of  Archbishops,  in  his  Introduction  to  the  New 
Series,  remarks  on  “  the  tendency  of  the  Reformation  to  individualize 
Christianity.” 

2  “  Si  l’argument  de  M.  de  Meaux  vaut  quelque  chose  contre  la  Re¬ 
formation,  il  a  la  meme  force  contre  le  Christianisme.”— Beausobre, 

Hist,  de  Manichee ,  1. 526,  and  see  Mr.  Buckle’s  remarks,  H ,  C.  E.,  II.  283. 

The  objection  raised  disappears  when  the  nature  of  the  subject-matter 
of  Revelation,  with  its  difficulties  of  application  and  interpretation,  is 
considered.  Compare  Hallam,  Literature  of  Europe ,  III.  268. 

3  Bacon’s  Works  (ed.  Spedding),  VIII.  165. 


12 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST  [Lect.  I. 


been  held  to  be  the  system  most  in  conformity  with 
the  nature  of  society,  and  most  favourable  to  the 
solidity  and  general  efficiency  of  religion.1  Some, 
however,  may  be  inclined  to  attribute  to  the  objection, 
suggestedby  the  argument  of  Bossuet,  an  importance 
disproportioned  to  its  worth.  It  certainly  entails  on 
the  Christian  advocate  the  task  of  showing  that  the 
disagreement  among  Christians  has  not  been  vital, 
nor  its  degree  such  as  to  neutralize  the  common  effect 
due  to  the  religion  of  Christ  as  a  whole.  In  accom¬ 
plishing  the  work  whereunto  it  is  sent,  the  robe  of 
Christ  is  still  44  without  seam,  woven  from  the  top 
throughout.”  Moreover,  whatever  have  been  its 
fortunes,  its  proper  tendencies  remain ;  and  these 
undoubtedly  act  to  44  draw  men  together  in  spite 
of  their  worst  differences,  proving  it  to  be  quite 
as  abhorrent  of  divisions  in  itself  as  Nature  ever 
a  warn-  was  of  a  vacuum.” 2  Still,  if  union  is  strength, 
ever,  to  persistent  differences  mean  permanent  weakness, 

increase  of  It  is  then  surely  time  for  the  great  sections  of  the 
unity.  Christian  world 3  to  study  unity  and  not  division  ; 

1  See  Guizot’s  Meditations ,  Pt.  II.,  pp.  5, 165  (E.  T.)  ;  Paley,  Evid .,  II. 
c.  vii. ;  and  compare  Ffoulkes’  Divisions  of  Christendom ,  p.  246.  “  There 
is  even  consolation,”  &c.  It  is  true,  however,  as  Dr.  Westcott  has  re¬ 
marked,  after  Comte,  that  the  tendencies  of  Protestantism  go  to  obscure 
the  conception  of  continuity  in  human  progress,  reposing  too  much  on 
logical  deduction.  “  To  erect  any  one  age  (whether  primitive  or  me¬ 
diaeval)  into  an  idol  is  to  deny  implicitly  that  the  Gospel  is  life.” — Con- 
temp.  Review ,  YI.  420.  See  also  Dorner,  Ilist.  Protestant  Theology , 
Yol.  I.,  p.  xviii.,  E.  T. 

2  Ffoulkes,  u.  s.,  p.  vi.  and  p.  252. 

3  Compare  Guizot,  Meditations ,  Pt.  I.,  Pref.,  pp.  ix.-xvii,  “  Je  dis 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIOUS  SYSTEMS. 


13 


alliance  and  not  mutual  elimination;  to  give  up 
claims  to  a  several  infallibility ;  to  join  at  least  for 
the  defence  of  the  faith  “  once  delivered  to  the 
saints  ” ;  to  exhibit  the  bases  of  a  common  belief ; 
to  cherish  more  strongly  than  hitherto  their  under¬ 
lying  points  of  agreement ;  to  drop  dissensions, 
and  go  forth  to  conquer. 

§  4.  But  it  may  be  asked  at  the  outset — is  Per-  Perma- 

^  ~  J  #  nence  an 

manence  of  itself  a  test  of  truth  ?  1  Is  that  which  actual  test 

of  truth. 

is  true  always  enduring  and  error  never  so  ? 

Have  not  unreal  systems  held  sway  and  made 
progress  in  the  history  of  mankind  ?  Is  there 
no  such  thing  as  a  prescription  of  ignorance  ? 2  Is 
retrogression  a  thing  impossible,  and  is  there  no 
historical  proof  of  it?  Are  periods  of  “ denuda- 


l’Eglise  Chretienne  :  c’est  toute  l’Eglise  Chretienne  en  effet,  et  non  pas 
telle  011  telle  des  eglises  chretiennes  qui  est  maintenant  et  radicalement 
attaquee.” 

1  It  will  perhaps  he  said  that  truth  is  strictly  an  attribute  of  proposi¬ 
tions  only  ;  and  in  this  sense  no  one  will  deny  that  what  is  true  is  true 
for  always,  though  it  may  not  at  all  times  be  recognized.  But  the  term 
seems  not  improperly  used  of  whatever  answers  to  the  definition  of  a 
thing.  In  the  case  of  institutions,  some  come  up  to  the  idea  or  notion 
commonly  held  of  their  nature  and  function ;  some  fall  short  of  it. 
Christianity  is  sometimes  regarded  as  a  set  of  dogmas  or  propositions 
(such  as  have  been  termed  fundamentals ),  of  which  truth  is  imme¬ 
diately  predicable.  Sometimes  it  is  identified  with  the  Church,  which 
is  the  witness  and  keeper  of  these  truths.  In  this  capacity,  as  liable 
to  the  admixture  of  error,  it  may  be  compared  with  rival  religious 
systems,  and  may  vary  at  different  periods  relatively  to  itself.  Perma¬ 
nence  in  the  form  of  persistence  in  consciousness  seems  to  lie  at  the  basis 
of  all  reality.  See  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer,  First  Principles ,  p.  226. 

2  “  Consuetudo  sine  veritate  vetustas  erroris  est.” — Cyprian,  Ep.  74. 
Opp.,  p.  282. 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST 


[Lect.  I. 


14 

tion 99  unknown  in  the  intellectual  eras  of  our 
race  ?  Does  truth  always  emerge  from  behind  the 
mists  of  falsehood  and  make  daylight  in  the  world? 
Perhaps  not ;  and  yet  the  answer  to  such  doubts 
may  be  in  no  wise  doubtful.  The  day  is  really 
past,  notwithstanding  some  pretentious  objections, 
for  questioning  the  tendencies  of  God’s  moral 
Liable  to  government.  Exceptions,  which  constitute  only 
exceptions.  the  disorder  of  Nature,  yield  no  argument  against 
its  general  laws.  66  God,”  says  Bishop  Butler, 
“  makes  use  of  a  variety  of  means,  what  we 
often  think  tedious  ones,  in  the  natural  course  of 
Providence  for  the  accomplishment  of  all  His 
ends.”  1  The  analogy  of  reason  as  against  force, 
which  has  been  employed  by  the  same  author  to 
illustrate  the  tendency  of  right  to  prevail  in  the 
economy  of  the  world,  affords  a  similar  explanation 
of  the  victories  of  error  over  truth  in  the  working 
of  religious  systems. 

Virtute  semper  pr£e valet  sapientia. 

The  lesson  gained  from  a  criticism  of  the  past  is 
this  :  that  while  it  is  consistent  with  an  overruling 
Providence  to  allow  the  existence  of  falsehood,  ex¬ 
travagance,  self-delusion  in  almost  every  form,  yet 
there  is,  on  the  whole,  a  constant  steady  advance 
towards  convictions  which  are  finally  recognized 

1  Analogy ,  Pt.  II.  c.  iv.  Comp.  Eurip.  Orestes ,  420 : 

Me'AAet  to  Of  toy  earl  tolovtov  (fivaei. 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIOUS  SYSTEMS. 


15 


as  immutably  true.  And  this  progress  of  truth  is 
not  dependent  on  blind  tendencies,  but  on  an 
intellectual  activity  which,  gradually  disposing  of 
error,  transforms  opinion  into  knowledge.  This 
which  is  evident  in  the  experience  of  the  physical 
sciences  holds  good  equally  for  the  more  complex 
subjects  of  theology  and  morals.  But  the  results 
must  naturally  be  sought  not  among  the  least  but 
among  the  most  civilized  portions  of  mankind. 
Length  of  time  together  with  reasonable  oppor¬ 
tunity  may  be  requisite  for  the  extinction  of  error. 
Duration  and  stress  of  persecution,  stamping  out 
conscientious  belief,  may,  in  some  instances,  ac¬ 
count  for  the  depression  of  truth.  To  some  extent 
they  explain  and  help  on  its  progress.1  Degrada¬ 
tion,  partial  or  temporary,  seems  to  be  an  historical 
condition  of  the  general  advance  of  civilization.2 

1  “Le  besoin  perfectionne  l’instrument,”  was  a  maxim  of  Turgot. 

In  times  of  peace,”  says  Archbishop  Leighton,  “  the  Church  may 

dilate  more  and  build  as  it  were  into  breadth,  but  in  times  of  trouble  it 
arises  more  in  height.  It  is  then  built  upwards,  as  in  cities  where  men 
are  straitened,  they  build  usually  higher  than  in  the  country,” — Op. 
Coleridge,  Aids  to  i?.,  p.  73. 

2  “  Ages  of  laborious  ascent  have  been  followed  by  a  moment  of  rapid 
downfall,  and  the  several  climates  of  the  globe  have  felt  the  vicissitudes 
of  light  and  darkness.  Yet  the  experience  of  four  thousand  years  should 
enlarge  our  hopes  and  diminish  our  apprehensions.”— Gibbon,  Vol.  IV. 
409  (ed.  Milman).  “  Humanity  accomplishes  its  necessary  destiny  but 
(being  composed  of  free  persons)  with  an  element  of  liberty  ;  so  that 
error  and  crime  find  their  place  in  its  course,  and  we  behold  centuries 
which  do  not  advance,  but  even  recede,  days  of  illness,  and  years  of 
wandering.  .  .  .  But  mankind  never  entirely  or  irremediably  errs.  The 
light  burns  somewhere  which  is  to  go  to  the  front  of  the  straying  gene¬ 
ration  and  bring  it  along  in  its  wake.  When  the  Gospel  failed  in  the 


grounded 
on  a  rea¬ 
sonable 
conviction. 


1 6  PERMANENCE  A  TEST  [Lect.  I. 

But  an  inversion  of  the  order  of  the  universe,  as 
well  as  of  our  inbred  convictions,  of  our  experi¬ 
ence  of  things  as  well  as  of  our  inner  consciousness, 
must  take  place  before  we  can  admit  indifference 
or  malice,  a  willingness  to  deceive  or  a  capacity  of 
deception  in  the  Author  and  Administrator  of  the 
world.  And  yet  this  is  implied  in  the  assumption 
that  the  human  race  in  its  most  distinguished 
representatives  and  on  the  subjects  of  the  highest 
moment  lies  still  in  darkness.1  “  God  owes  it  to 
mankind  not  to  lead  them  into  error,”  is  the  bold 
language  of  Pascal.2  “  Truth,”  says  Milton,  “  is 
strong  next  to  the  Almighty.”  As  it  is  ludicrous 

East  it  dawned  on  the  races  of  the  North.” — Ozanam,  Civilis.  Chret .,  I. 
pp.  18-20,  E.  T.  Mr.  Tylor,  Hist.  Prim.  Cult .,  I.  421,  speaking  of 
natural  religion,  remarks  that  “  the  history  of  religion  displays  but  too 
plainly  the  proneness  of  mankind  to  relapse,  in  spite  of  reformation, 
into  the  lower  and  darker  condition  of  the  past.” 

1  There  is  a  tendency  in  the  Positivist  system  to  assume  not  only  that 
in  the  constitution  of  things  error  is  employed  as  a  means  to  truth,  but 
that  this  theorem  covers  the  whole  of  religious  belief.  Thus  theology, 
which  in  this  system  of  thought  is  imaginary ,  is  allowed  to  have  been 
an  important  stage  in  the  advance  of  the  human  race,  yet  only  as  a  sort 
of  “  pis-aller.”  See  Comte,  Phil.  Pos .,  IV.  693.  The  language  of  the 
Apostle  in  Acts  xvii.  30  ( tovs  gev  ovv  xpovovs  rr/s  ayvoicts  vnepidiov  6 
Qeos)  may  in  the  English  version  be  liable  to  be  mistaken.  But  his 
argument  on  this  deeply  momentous  subject,  “  the  fulness  of  times,”  as 
expanded  in  Rom.  c.  i.,  ii.,  and  Gal.  iii.,  iv.,  can  hardly  be  misappre¬ 
hended.  See  Bunsen,  God  in  History ,  Vol.  I.  215,  E.  T. 

2  “  Dieu  doit  aux  hommes  de  lie  pas  les  induire  en  erreur.” — Pensees. 
“  The  established  order  of  things  in  which  we  find  ourselves,  if  it  has  a 
Creator,  must  surely  speak  of  His  will  in  its  broad  outlines  and  main 
issues.” — Newman,  Grammar  of  Assent,  p.  391.  Comp.  Farrar’s  Wit¬ 
ness  of  History  to  Christ,  p.  92.  See  Sir  W.  Hamilton  ( Reid ,  743,  745). 
Mr.  Mill’s  criticism  {Exam.,  p.  136)  is  invalid  so  long  as  there  are  truths 
of  consciousness  leading  up  to  the  recognition  of  God. 


Lect.  I.] 


OF  RELIGIO  US  S  YSTEMS. 


1 7 

to  go  about  to  prove  the  reality  of  those  percep¬ 
tions  which  alone  exist  to  us  as  the  means  of 
discovering  facts ;  so  were  it  futile  to  suspect  the 
ultimate  triumph  of  truth  over  falsehood,  or  to 
question  the  tendency  of  things  in  the  long  run 
to  exhibit  its  progress.  The  improvement  of 
mankind  in  successive  ages  is  indisputable,  and 
improvement  involves  at  least  approximation  to 
truth.  Whatever  be  the  obstacles  to  their  power 
of  self-assertion,  the  Grand  Justiciary  of  reason 
and  of  fact  is  Time.1 

§  5.  What,  however,  is  meant  by  Time  in  these  Time  in 

**  '  t  what  sense 

considerations,  and  how  much  may  justly  be  attri-  an  agency, 
buted  to  it  ?  In  what  respects  is  it  an  element  of 
progress  in  the  history  of  knowledge  ?  It  is  no 
mere  abstraction  or  Idol  of  the  Tribe.  It  is  a  real 
condition  of  all  human  operation,  speculative  or 
practical.  Its  function  may  be  compared  to  an 
analytic  yet  constructive  process  ;  which  dividing 
and  disengaging  elements  before  believed  to  be 
inseparable,  renders  re-arrangement  and  recon¬ 
struction  possible  and  simple.2  Such  is  the  work 

1  “  Le  temps,  le  grand  Justicier  du  passe.” — Montaigne.  Cicero 
(Nat.  D.,  II.  ii.  5),  speaking  of  the  existence  of  God,  says  :  “  Quod  nisi 
cognitum  comprehensumque  animis  haberemus,  non  tam  stabilis  opinio 
permaneret,  nec  confirmaretur  diuturnitate  temporis  nec  una  cum  sa3- 
culis  Eetatibusque  bominum  inveterari  potuisset.  Et  enim  videmus 
cameras  opiniones  fictas  atque  vanas  diuturnitate  extabuisse.  .  .  .  Opi- 
nionum  enim  commenta  delet  dies,  naturm  judicia  confirmat.” 

2  M.  Littre  (A.  Comte  et  la  Phil.  Pos.,  p.  45)  well  observes :  “  Le 
temps,  faisant  l’office  des  forts  grossissements,  montre  disjoint  ce  qui 
apparait  etroitement  conjoint  dans  l’esprit  d’un  meme  penseur.” 

C 


1 8 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST 


[Lect.  I. 

of  continuous  generations  toiling  unconsciously  as 
one  man  in  the  quest  of  Truth,  hut  with  this 
advantage,  that  they  are  uninterrupted  by  indi¬ 
vidual  mortality.1  Some  thinkers  use  Time  too 
readily  and  profusely2  as  an  agent,  whether  in 
physical  changes,  or  in  the  advance  of  opinion  and 
the  overthrow  of  superstitions  by  a  sort  of  natural 
and  spontaneous  growth  of  the  human  mind — a 
gradual  evolution  of  conviction,  the  spirit  and 
tendency  of  the  age,  the  fruit  of  time  and  succes¬ 
sion.  It  should  be  clearly  understood  that  all 
such  results  are,  in  fact,  the  work  of  individual 
effort,  admitting  of  distinct  explanation.  The 
tendencies  of  an  age  are  the  unperceived  con¬ 
sequences  of  foregone  argument.  They  are 
“  changes  wrought  not  by  Time,  but  in  Time.” 
In  the  work  of  religious  “  truth,”  it  has  been 
finely  said,3  “Time  means  the  blood  of  many 
martyrs,  the  toil  of  many  brains,  slow  steps  made 
good  through  infinite  research.”  In  this  manner 

1  “  De  sorte  que  toute  la  suite  des  homines,  pendant  le  cours  de  tant 
de  sikcles,  doit  etre  considdree  comme  un  meme  homme  qui  subsiste 
toujours  et  qui  apprend  continuellement.” — Pascal  ( Pensees ,  I.  p.  98). 

2  Thus  “  the  prehistoric  archaeologist,”  says  Mr.  Tylor,  Hist.  Prim. 
Cult.,  I.  p.  50,  “  shows  even  too  much  disposition  to  revel  in  calculations 
of  thousands  of  years,  as  a  financier  does  in  reckonings  of  thousands  of 
pounds  in  a  liberal  and  maybe  somewhat  reckless  way.”  See,  however, 
Lange,  Gesch.  d.  Mater ialismus,  p.  342.  In  the  School  of  Positive 
Science,  “c’est  le  temps  qui  est  ici  le  grand  createur,”  says  M.  Janet. — 
Le  Materialisme  Contemporain ,  p.  24. 

3  Greg’s  Literary  and  Social  Judgments ,  p.  478.  Compare  Professor 
Goldwin  Smith,  Study  of  History,  p.  34.  Human  progress  “is  a  pro¬ 
gress  of  effort,  not  a  necessary  development,”  &c. 


Lect.  I.] 


OF  RELIGIO  US  S  YSTEMS. 


19 


it  comes  about  that  no  great  verity  once  dis¬ 
covered  is  ever  afterwards  lost  to  mankind,1  but 
is  taken  up  and  carried  along  by  the  stream  of 
human  effort.  In  the  words  of  the  poet  they  are 

Truths  that  wake 
To  perish  never. 

§6.  The  objections  which  lie  against  all  posi- The  pre- 
tive2  attempts  to  criticise  the  plan  of  a  Divine  ment,  a 
Revelation,  do  not  apply  to  an  inquiry  which  is posterioru 
relative  to  a  matter  of  fact.  The  present  argu¬ 
ment  does  not  run  up  into  questionable  final 
causes,  or  depend  for  its  acceptance  on  dubious 
interpretations  of  remote  prophecies.  It  forms  no  Not  de¬ 
anticipations  of  the  thoughts  of  Heaven.  But^enton 

rather  it  humbly  seeks  to  track  upwards  through  causes‘ 

1  “  No  great  truth  which  has  once  been  found  has  ever  afterwards  been 
lost.” — Buckle,  Hist.  Civ.,  I.  215.  “  What  has  once  become  the  common 
property  of  humanity,  i.  e.  any  visible  presentation  of  a  principle  that 
has  come  to  he  universally  recognized  and  universally  operative,  cannot 
perish,  hut  has  life  in  itself.  .  .  .  Such  ideas  form  the  pathway  of  God 
in  history— the  light  of  Heaven  amid  the  darkness  of  the  earth.”— 

Bunsen,  God  in  Hist.,  I.  p.  36,  53.  Compare  Aristotle,  Metaph.,  xi.  7  : 

Tauray  ray  8o£as  eneivcov,  oiov  7 repicrecrcocrOcu  p^XP1  T°v  vvv. 

Bacon’s  self-contradiction  that  “  Time  seemeth  to  be  of  the  nature  of  a 
river  or  stream  which  carrieth  down  to  us  that  which  is  light  and  blown 
up,  and  sinketh  and  drowneth  that  which  is  weighty  and  solid,”  has 
been  very  properly  exposed  by  Mr.  Mill,  Logic,  II.  428. 

2  Positive,  because,  though  we  may  see  that  many  parts  of  Chris¬ 
tianity  are  worthy  of  God,  we  are  not  hastily  to  conclude  that  where 
we  do  not  see  this  such  parts  do  not  come  from  Him.  See  Rogers, 

Essays ,  II.  379.  “  It  is  no  just  consequence  that  reason  is  no  judge  of 

what  is  offered  to  us  as  being  of  divine  revelation.  For  this  would  be 
to  infer  that  we  are  unable  to  judge  of  anything  because  we  are  unable 
to  judge  of  all  things.” — Butler,  Analogy,  Pt.  II.  c.  iii. 

c  2 


20 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST 


[Lect.  I. 


tlie  past  the  course  of  “  natural  revelation,”  apply¬ 
ing  to  ascertained  matters  of  fact  the  lamp  of 
inherited  experience.  So 

By  the  light  His  words  disclose, 

Watch  Time’s  full  river  as  it  flows : 

Scanning  His  gracious  Providence, 

Where  not  too  deep  for  mortal  sense. 

All  the  irregularity  of  human  affairs  arises  from 
our  not  being  able  to  see  the  whole  at  once.  But 
the  further  we  advance  along  the  world’s  history 
and  in  general  knowledge,  the  more  we  approach 
an  estimate  of  the  reasons  of  things  and  of  the 
current  of  affairs.1  It  is  not  then  the  existence  of 
final  causes  in  the  formation  and  working  of  the 
world  which  needs  he  held  unsatisfactory  by  the 

1  “  The  moral  system  of  the  universe,”  says  a  powerful  but  uncertain 
writer,  “  is  like  a  document  written  in  alternate  ciphers,  which  change 
from  line  to  line.  We  read  a  sentence,  but  at  the  next  the  key  fails  us. 
We  see  that  there  is  something  written  there,  but  if  we  guess  at  it  we 
are  guessing  in  the  dark.”  Yet  the  same  author  is  not  long  in  supply¬ 
ing  an  antidote  to  any  scepticism  which  may  lurk  in  such  reflections. 
“  If  we  believe,”  he  adds,  “  at  all  that  the  world  is  governed  by  a  con¬ 
scious  and  intelligent  Being,  we  must  believe  also,  however  we  can 
reconcile  it  with  our  own  ideas,  that  these  anomalies  have  not  arisen  by 
accident,  but  have  been  ordered  of  purpose  and  design.” — Froude  on 
Calvinism ,  p.  5.  This,  Butler  points  out,  is  the  necessary  result  of  the 
government  of  God  considered  as  a  scheme  in  progress ,  and  therefore 
imperfectly  comprehended.  See  also  Shaftesbury,  Characteristics ,  II. 
363,  and  the  fine  passage  in  Plato,  Legg .,  X.  903.  Augustine  compares 
the  order  of  the  universe  to  a  tessellated  floor,  of  which  we  hold  the 
part.  “At  enim,”  he  adds,  “  hoc  ipsum  est  plenius  quasstionum,  quod 
membra  pulicis  disposita  mire  atque  distincta  sunt,  cum  interea  hu- 
mana  vita  innumerabilium  perturbationum  inconstant!  a  versetur  et 
fluctuet.” — I)e  Or  dine,  c.  i.  “  La  seule  question,”  says  M.  Renan, 
Etudes ,  p.  404,  “  interessante  pour  le  philosophe  est  de  savoir  de  quel 
cote  va  le  mondc.” 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIO  US  S  YSTEMS. 


21 


physical  or  positive  philosophy  of  our  time. 
Teleology,  as  such,  is  not  destroyed  but  rather 
confirmed  by  any  theory  of  evolution.  For  such 
evolution  must  either  he  accidental,  a  purely 
fortuitous  result,  which  is  hardly  credible,  and 
certainly  will  not  satisfy  science ;  or  it  bears 
testimony  to  design;  the  process,  which  appa¬ 
rently  involves  waste,  proving  ultimately  economi¬ 
cal,1  The  procedure  indicated  may  he  gradual 
aud  to  appearance  precarious,  but  the  result  shows 
an  adaptation  of  means  to  ends  which  is  all  that 
Paley  and  other  adherents  of  Natural  Theology 
have  maintained.  It  is  the  previous  assumption 
of  a  given  design  as  the  basis  of  argument,  to 
which  exception  may  fairly  be  taken.  The  co¬ 
incidence  of  facts  with  the  theory  of  a  Divine  Though 

.  .  coincident 

purpose  rests,  m  the  mam,  on  a  matter  of  observa-  with  them, 
tion,  analogous  to  the  homologies  of  Natural 
Science^  and  open  to  common  apprehension.2  We 

1  The  argument  of  La  Place  from  chances  is  well  known.  Thus,  e.  g. 

“  two  properties  necessary  to  the  stability  of  the  planetary  system  are — 

(1),  that  the  orbital  motions  must  be  all  in  the  same  direction  ;  (2),  that 
the  inclinations  of  the  planes  of  these  orbits  must  not  be  considerable. 

Taking  the  theory  of  mere  chance,  it  is  2047  to  1  against  the  first ; 
10,000,000  to  1  against  the  second ;  more  than  20,000,000,000  against 
the  two  together,”  &c.  This  argument  has  been  much  strengthened  by 
more  newly  discovered  planets.  The  objection  sometimes  raised  to  the 
teleological  argument  that  the  Author  of  Nature,  being  above  Nature,  is 
incapable  of  analogies  drawn  from  the  finite  creature,  becomes  absorbed 
in  a  much  larger  question — the  possibility  and  conditions  of  a  philo¬ 
sophy  of  the  Absolute. 

2  “  If  has  been  objected  that  the  doctrine  of  Final  Causes  supposes  us 
to  be  acquainted  with  the  intentions  of  the  Creator,  which,  it  is  in- 


22 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST  [Lect.  I. 


cannot  but  see,  if  we  take  room  enough  for 
observation,  which  way  things  have  tended  in 
the  world.  And  certainly  such  a  result,  gathered 
from  the  point  of  view  of  comparative  history, 
extending  over  large  areas  of  countries  and  times, 
is  of  the  highest  moment  to  a  philosophic  survey 
of  affairs.  “  For  what,”  it  has  been  justly  asked, 
“does  it  avail  to  praise  and  draw  forth  to  view  the 
magnificence  and  wisdom  of  creation  in  the  irra¬ 
tional  kingdom  of  nature,  if  that  part  in  the  great 
stage  of  the  Supreme  Wisdom  which  contains  the 
object  of  all  this  mighty  display  (I  mean  the 
history  of  the  human  species),  is  to  remain  an 
eternal  objection  to  it,  the  bare  sight  of  which 
obliges  us  to  turn  away  our  eyes  in  dis|3leasure, 
and,  from  the  despair  which  it  raises  of  ever  dis¬ 
covering  in  it  a  perfect  and  rational  purpose,  leads 

sinuated,  is  a  most  presumptuous  and  irrational  basis  for  our  reasonings. 
But  there  can  be  nothing  presumptuous  or  irrational  in  reasoning  on 
that  basis,  which,  if  we  reject,  we  cannot  reason  at  all.” — WhewelCirc- 
dications ,  p.  93.  The  sense  of  order  perceptible  in  the  inorganic  world 
of  matter  is  not  identical  with  design ,  though  it  may  lead  up  to  it.  The 
present  relation  of  physical  science  to  the  question  of  design  seems  to 
stand  thus .  its  lesults  point  undoubtedly  to  design,  but  to  design  im¬ 
perfectly  comprehended  by  our  natural  faculties.  The  resource  lies  in 
Revelation  ;  but  it  does  not  follow  that  Revelation  must  speak  on  these 
points  to  man.  Comp.  Lange,  G eschichte  v.  Materiaiismus ,  pp.  402—404. 
M.  Flourens  has  well  observed  :  “  11  faut  aller  non  pas  des  causes  finales 
aux  faits,  mais  des  faits  aux  causes  finales.”  It  may  be  doubted  whether 
the  human  reason  can  ever  truly  separate  the  notions  of  cause  and  effect, 
antecedent  and  consequent,  end  and  means:  all  these  suggest,  and 
indeed  necessitate,  a  presiding  original  thought.  Whether  such  thought 
be  regarded  as  immanent  in  the  universe,  or  as  external  to  it,  must  be 
determined  by  other  considerations. 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIOUS  SYSTEMS. 


23 


us  finally  to  look  for  such  only  in  another  world.” 1 
Hence  the  perennial  faith  through  successive 
generations  in  a  God  revealed  in  history,  in  a 
Divine  government  of  the  world,  in  human  pro¬ 
gress  based  on  a  moral  order  accomplishing  an 
Eternal  Idea,' in  a  nature  not  composed  of  isolated 
episodes,2  in  an  “  increasing  purpose  ”  running 
through  the  ages  of  the  past.  Its  evidence  lies 
written  in  the  annals  of  our  race,  even  through 
periods  of  stagnancy  and  devastation,  and  in  no 
part  of  it  more  markedly  than  in  the  religious 
crises  of  nations. 


§  7.  A  question  may  be  raised  as  to  the  relative  Objection 
character  of  our  ideas  of  duration  and  permanence,  relative 

•  dicir^ctcr 

Christianity  is  an  institution  which  we  believe  to  ofthe 
be,  as  to  its  future,  coeval  with  the  world  itself,  duration. 
In  this  way  our  conception  of  its  continuance  is 
indefinitely  extended,  and  this  extension  reacts 
upon  its  past  history.  Though  its  first  ages  may 
be  bounded  by  the  fact  of  its  historical  origin,  its 
u  last  times  ”  are  beyond  our  grasp,  and  so,  too,  all 


1  Kant,  Idea  of  a  Universal  History  on  a  Cosmopolitical  Plan ,  trans¬ 
lated  by  De  Quincey.  Works ,  Vol.  XIV.  151. 

2  O vk  eoiKe  d’  17  (fivcns  e7rei(To8LG)8r]S  ovcra  £k  tcov  (ficuvopevoov,  coanep 
fio%6r]pa  rpayaftia. — Aristotle,  A letaph.,  XIII.  c.  iii.,  ix.,  x.  Compare 
Bunsen,  God  in  History ,  Vol.  I.  pp.  6,  13,  20,  E.  T. :  “  No  one  looking 
back  over  the  past  can  fail  to  detect  a  general  advance  of  humanity,  as 
a  whole,  in  certain  definite  directions  corresponding  to  what  we  observe 
in  the  fuller  development  of  the  man.  The  progress  on  a  large  scale 
exhibits  the  harmonious  elevation  of  our  whole  complex  being,  even 
though  periods  of  devastation  and  fiery  trial  are  needed  for  the  prepara¬ 
tion  of  the  fuller  growth.” — Dr.  Westcott,  Contemp.  Rev.,  Vol.  VIII.  380. 


24 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST  [Lect.  I. 


conception  of  its  relative  duration.  Though  already 
long-lived  to  all  appearance,  it  may  yet  not  have 
passed  its  youth ;  and  the  span  of  its  coming  years 
may  still  far  exceed  those  that  are  past.1  “  Cen¬ 
turies  on  centuries,”  it  has  been  well  said,  “  may 
be  required  to  discipline  fully  the  human  faculties 
that  are  to  grow  into  the  faith  which  has  been 
prepared  for  them.” 2  But  the  standard  of  dura- 
its  answer,  bility  which  we  are  now  applying  is  external  to 
Christianity  itself.  We  compare  it  as  a  mundane 
institution  with  all  things  else  that  are  mundane. 
In  these  we  find  but  one  and  the  same  law.  They 
tend  to  decay  and  subversion. 

Sic  omnia  fatis 

In  pejus  mere  ac  retro  sublapsa  referri. 

1  Comp.  De  Maistre,  CEuvres ,  p.  262,  ed.  Migne :  “  On  parle  beaucoup 
des  premiers  siecles  du  ChristianiSme ;  en  verite,  je  ne  voudrais  pas 
assurer  qu’ils  sont  passes.  Dans  un  sens  l’Eglise  n’a  point  d’^ge.  . 

Elle  se  releve  avec  l’homme,  l’accompagne,  et  le  perfectionne  dans 
toutes  les  situations ;  differente  en  cela  et  d’une  maniere  frappante  de 
toutes  les  institutions  et  de  tous  les  empires  humains  qui  ont  une 
enfance,  une  virilite,  une  vieillesse  et  une  fin.” 

2  Hutton’s  Essays ,  Vol.  I.  122  :  “It  is  clear  that  the  Divine  govern¬ 
ment  of  the  Jewish  race  was  meant  to  bring  out  and  did  bring  out  more 
distinctly  the  personality  of  God,  while  the  history  of  other  races  brings 
out  moie  cleaily  the  Divine  capacities  of  man.  Hence  the  co-operation 
ol  diffeient  nations  was  requisite  for  the  efficiency  of  the  revelation. 
Centuries  were  required  for  the  complete  evolution  even  of  that  special 
Jewish  history  that  was  selected  to  testify  to  the  righteous  will  and 
defined  spiritual  character  of  the  Creator.  Centuries  on  centuries  will 
be  required  to  discipline  fully  the  human  faculties  that  are  to  grow  into 
the  faith  thus  prepared  for  them.”  So  also  M.  Guizot :  “  Civilization 
is  as  yet  very  young :  the  world  has  as  yet  by  no  means  measured  the 
whole  of  its  career ;  Human  thought  is  at  this  time  very  far  from  being 
all  that  it  is  capable  of  becoming :  we  are  very  far  from  comprehending 
the  whole  future  of  humanity.” — Civil,  in  Europe ,  p.  18,  Ed.  Bohn. 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIO  US  S  YSTEMS. 


25 


It  lias  not  been  so,  however,  with  the  religion 
of  Christ.  Its  strength  is  not  as  its  day.  Its  days 
are  old,  if  we  judge  them  by  man’s  standard  of 
duration ;  yet  its  powers  are  unenfeebled.  Its 
youth  is  renewed  as  the  eagle’s,  and  its  years 
do  not  fail.  The  revolutions  of  the  heavenly 
bodies  point  to  an  almost  infinite  succession  of 
ages,  through  which  they  have  held  on  their  way. 
Yet  science  sketches  out  the  trajectory  which  is 
followed  by  our  planetary  system.1  So  the  world 
may  have  a  long  future  still  before  it ;  and  yet  it 
is  permitted  us  to  determine  the  path  of  Chris¬ 
tianity.  The  progress  indicated,  whether  in  nature 
or  in  revelation,  is  not  indefinite,  but  tends  to  a 
limit.  But  if  this  observation  be  deemed  pre¬ 
sumptuous  with  the  long  track  behind  us  of 
geologic  time  and  prehistoric  evolution,  it  is  at 
least  not  more  so  than  to  proclaim  the  finality  of  a 
positive  stage  of  thought,  as  the  u  be  all  and  end 
all”  of  man’s  estate.  Christianity,  while  pro¬ 
claiming  the  ultimate  dissolution  of  things  at  the 
last  day,  leaves  its  approach  indefinite,  though  its 

1  “  Le  cycle  du  dessin  de  la  Nature  semble  exiger  pour  se  clore  un  si 
long  temps  que  la  petite  portion  que  l’humanite  en  a  deja  parcourue 
ne  permet  pas  d’en  determiner  la  forme  et  de  conclure  la  relation  des 
parties  au  tout,  avec  plus  de  surete  que  toutes  les  observations  celestes 
faites  jusqu’a  present  ne  permettent  d’assigner  la  trajectoire  que  suit 
dans  le  ciel  etoile  notre  soleil  avec  toute  l’armee  de  ses  satellites.  Et 
cependant  remarquons  qu’avec  le  principe  general  de  la  constitution 
systematique  de  l’univers  et  avec  le  peu  qu’on  a  observe,  on  est  autorise 
a  conclure  qu’il  existe  en  effet  line  telle  trajectoire.” — Kant,  u.  s.  ap. 
Littre,  A.  Comte  et  la  Phil.  Pos p.  63. 


2  6 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST  [Lect.  I. 


arrival  be  certain.1  Already  it  is  possible  to  apply 

durabmty  some  tests  of  its  Persistent  vitality.  For  in  what 
«le  do  the  organic  forces  of  any  religion  consist ,  or  at 
gions.  the  least  exhibit  themselves  ?  Surely  in  their  hold 
upon  the  consciences,  lives,  and  actions  of  men  \  in 
their  tendency  to  extend  themselves  by  conversion 
of  unbelief ;  and  in  their  power  of  assimilating 
healthfully  the  altered  conditions  of  advancing 
civilization.  This  power,  if  shown  to  arise  from 
principles  contained  in  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel, 
furnishes  an  argument  in  favour  of  the  truth  of 
Christianity  which  has  the  force  of  prophecy,  for 
they  are  long  prior  to  the  discovery  of  the  general 
laws  of  human  progress.  But  the  most  ancient  as 
well  as  the  most  widely-spread  religions  of  the 
earth,  Brahmanism,  Buddhism,  the  faiths  of  Con¬ 
fucius,  Zoroaster,  if  not  also  of  Mahomet,2  show 
no  tendency  to  propagate  themselves.  The  duty 
of  conversion  is  no  longer  felt ;  its  possibility  no 
longer  dreamed.  Not  so  with  the  Churches  of  the 
Christian  faith,  which  acknowledge  to  the  full 
the  obligation  of  missionary  labour,  whatever  be 

the  measure  of  success  attending  their  fulfilment 
of  it. 

i?omeCthen  §  8*  is  not>  of  course,  denied  that  ancient 

1  See  the  Bishop  of  Carlisle’s  lecture  on  the  Gradual  Development  of 
Bevelation ,  p.  30. 

Littic  has  justly  remaiked  that  the  immobility  of  a  religious 
belief  is  a  proof  of  a  want  of  genuine  belief  in  its  doctrines;  citing 
India  and  China  as  proofs  to  this  fact  .—Paroles  de  la  Phil.  Pos .]  p.  35^ 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIO  US  S  YSTEMS. 


2  7 


religions,  false  and  pernicious,  have  flourished  ^otmous 
through  immense  periods.  This  has  been  due  to  of  Eastern 

°  1  religions. 

the  elements  of  truth1  which  they  contained,  “a 
soul  of  goodness  in  things  evil and  still  more  to 
its  adaptation  to  the  order  of  the  development  of 
belief  in  the  history  of  primitive  culture.  Quantum 
sumus ,  scimus.  44  Men  must  think,”  it  has  been 

tersely  said,  4  4  in  such  terms  of  thought  as  they 
possess.”  2  It  is  a  fact  admitting  of  proof  whether  N°t valid 

1  o  ±  against 

Christianity  includes  elements  answering  to  truths  christian- 
but  dimly  shadowed  forth  in  heathen  systems ;  is  compre- 

J .  ...  hensive, 

in  the  Triads  or  Trinities,  for  example,  roughly 
touched  by  Brahmanism  or  Buddhism  ;  or  in  the 
Monotheism  of  the  creed  of  Mahomet.  It  has  been 
fairly  said,  44  Whatever  has  been  found  necessary 
in  the  course  of  6000  years’  experience,  we  have  a 
right  to  ask  of  that  which  offers  itself  as  the  one 
faith  for  mankind.” 3  The  question,  then,  is  not 
one  of  simple  length  of  date,  any  more  than  of  the 
numbers  who  accept  or  profess  a  religion,  as  if 
truth  were  settled  by  majorities.4  The  test  of  any 


1  “  The  spiritual  self-respect  of  individuals,  the  reconcilement  of  the 
conscience  by  means  of  atonement,  the  hopes  connected  with  the  unseen 
world,  had  all  once  been  provided  by  Paganism. :  as  they  must  be  by 
every  religion  which  has  had  a  real  historical  existence.” — Mackay, 
Rise  and  Progress  of  Christianity.  A  remark  true,  but  only  partially  so  : 
for  had  Paganism  actually  fulfilled  this  work,  it  had  never  passed  away. 

2  Herbert  Spencer,  First  Principles ,  p.  116. 

3  Maurice’s  Kingdoms  of  the  World ,  p.  162.  A  profound  view  of  the 
religious  history  of  mankind  will  regard  these  religions  rather  as  testi¬ 
monies  than  as  rivals  to  the  truth  of  Christianity. 

4  ''SlaTvep  iv  rais  xetporovicus. — Lucian,  Hermotimus,  c.  xvi.  Compare 


28 


progres¬ 

sive, 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST  [Lect.  I. 

system  will  lie  in  the  character  of  its  doctrines, 
combined  with  its  permanence  as  exhibited  in 
their  progressive  capacity.  If  Christianity  be  an 
imperfect  theory  of  our  relations  to  God  and  the 
universe,  it  must  needs  prove  transitory.  Mere 
antiquity  in  a  fixed  locality  decides  little  ;  though 
even  in  this  aspect  it  must  he  remembered  that  the 
faith  of  Christ  must  he  measured  by  the  age  of 
Judaism.1  But  where  still  extant,  these  world-old 
theologies  lack  the  criteria  of  permanence.  The 
wild  erratic  doctrines  of  Oriental  religions  have 

Max  Muller,  Chips ,  I.  p.  215.  On  this  point  the  Keformers  protested  at 
Spires  in  1529.  “  The  number  of  persons  holding  an  idea  is  no  warrant 
for  its  objective  character,  else  the  many  never  could  be  wrong  ;  for  uni¬ 
formity  of  education,  or  the  sympathy  kindled  by  enthusiasm,  may  carry 
many  minds  into  one  state  in  which  belief  in  certain  ideas  and  the  mis¬ 
take  of  formulae  or  usages  for  external  truths  will  be  natural  or  neces¬ 
sary,” — Newman,  Essay  on  Development ,  p.  31. 

1  “  Que  l’on  considere  la  perpetuity  de  la  religion  Chretienne,  qui  a 
toujours  subsiste  depuis  le  commencement  du  monde,  soit  dans  les  saints 
de  l’ancien  Testament,”  &c. — Pascal,  Pensees,  II.  p.  367.  This  is  flip¬ 
pantly  stated  by  Salvador  ( Paris ,  Pome  et  Jerusalem ,  I.  243)  :  “A  vance, 
dit-on  au  Juif,  et  declare-nous  quel  est  ton  nom  ....  ton  dge.  Mon 
age  ?  Deux  mille  ans  de  plus  que  Jesus-Christ.”  “  If  it  be  said  ”  (writes 
Dr.  Newman,  Oramm.  of  Assent )  “  the  Oriental  religions  are  older  than 
Christianity  by  some  centuries,  it  must  be  recollected  that  Christianity 
is  only  the  continuation  and  conclusion  of  what  professes  to  be  an  earlier 
revelation,  which  may  be  traced  back  into  prehistoric  times.”  “  Die 
Geschichte  dieses  alten  Volkes  (Israel)  ist  im  Grunde  die  Geschichte  der 
durch  alle  Stufenbis  zur  Vollendung  sicli  ausbildenden  wahren  Religion^ 
welclie  auf  diesem  engen  Volksgebiete  durch  alle  Kiimpfe  hindurch  sicli 
bis  zum  hochsten  Siege  erhebt  und  endlicli  in  aller  Herrlichkeit  und 
Macht  sich  offenbart ;  um  dann  von  da  aus  durch  ilire  eigene  Kraft  sich 
unwiderstelilich  verbreitend  nie  wieder  verloren  zu  gehen,  sondern 
ewiger  Besitz  und  Segen  aller  Volker  zu  werden.” — Ewald,  Gesch.  d.  V. 
Israel,  It  9,  whose  testimony  to  the  eternity  of  Christianity  I  could  not 
willingly  omit. 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIOUS  SYSTEMS. 


29 


produced  neither  in  respect  of  moral  or  spiritual 
truth  results  suitable  to  the  facts  of  human  nature, 
its  dignity  and  its  capacities.  They  have  wandered 
into  Polytheism.  “  Insufficient  for  time,  and  re¬ 
jecting  eternity,  their  utmost  triumph  is  to  live  with¬ 
out  fear  and  to  die  without  hope.”  1  Their  power 
has  steadily  declined  ;  and,  however  Buddhism  may 
with  truth  boast  of  its  ancient  missionary  zeal,2  they 
have  Ions:  since  ceased  to  extend  the  area  of  their  and  has 

0  survived 

beliefs.  They  have  never  yet  borne  the  brunt  of  the  ad- 

^  v  m  vance  of 

advancing  civilization.  These  are  the  questions  know- 
of  fact  with  Christianity.  The  religion  of  Europe 
has  passed  through  storms  of  barbarism,  persecu¬ 
tion,  and  doubt ;  while  over  Asia  has  brooded  an 
immemorial  calm,  broken  only  by  tides  of  military 
conquest.3  Nor  is  it  any  way  surprising  that  the 


1  Sir  J.  E.  Tennant,  Christianity  in  Ceylon ,  p.  227.  On  this  subject 
see  Hardwick,  Christ  and  other  Masters ,  II.  69 ;  Tylor  On  Primi¬ 
tive  Culture ,  II.  89,  96 ;  B.  St.  Hilaire,  Le  Bouddha.  “  Unques¬ 
tionably,”  writes  Mr.  Farrar,  Witness  of  History  to  Christ ,  p.  145, 
“Confucianism  and  Buddhism  are  in  their  social  influence  gigantic 
failures  ;  and  in  these  cases  M.  Benan  says,  ‘  Success  is  a  decisive  crite¬ 
rion.’  ”  Mr.  Picton,  New  Theories  and  Old  Faith ,  answering  a  remark 
of  Mr.  Armstrong  that  “the  cohesion  and  endurance  of  Buddhism 
mocks  and  shames  Christianity  with  her  many  convulsions  and  her 
reiterated  revolutions,”  ably  replies,  “  that  one  might  as  well  say  that 
the  cohesion  and  endurance  of  China  mocks  and  shames  Europe  with  its 
convulsions  and  its  reiterated  revolutions.  The  higher  the  life  the  more 
violent  often  are  the  crises  of  growth,  and  certainly  the  more  extreme  is 
the  differentiation  of  parts.” 

2  Max  Muller,  Chips ,  I.  269. 

3  “  The  popular  religions  of  antiquity  answered  only  for  a  certain 
stage  of  culture.  When  the  nations  in  the  course  of  their  progress  had 
passed  beyond  this,  the  necessary  consequence  was  a  dissevering  of  the 


30 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST 


[Lect.  I. 


faiths  of  Brahma  or  of  Buddha  should  linger  in 
the  world.  “  The  extinction  of  a  religion,”  it  has 
been  said  with  truth,  “  is  not  the  abrupt  move¬ 
ment  of  a  day  ;  it  is  a  secular  progress  of  many 
well-marked  stages.”  1  The  success  of  Buddhism 
rested  on  the  assertion  of  the  dogma  of  the  absolute 
equality  of  all  men ;  and  this  in  a  country  which 

Symptoms  for  ages  had  been  oppressed  with  caste.2  But  its 

of  decline  .  L  ± 

in  the  continuance,  as  well  as  that  of  Brahmanism,  philo- 

religions  .  7  1 

of  the  sophically  considered,  is  involved  in  its  representa¬ 
tion  of  an  inherent  polar  opposition  to  the  theology 
of  Christian  belief.  The  doctrine  of  a  transmigra¬ 
tion  of  souls,  of  a  simple  “  continuance-theory  ”  as 
to  a  future  state,  confronts  the  teaching  of  the 
independent  existence  of  a  personal  spirit,  of  a 
permanent  “  retribution-theory  ”  of  after-being. 
Materialism,  as  opposed  to  Theism,  must  ever  pre¬ 
sent  two  alternatives;  a  doctrine  of  absorption, 
ultimately  equivalent  to  Pantheism ;  or  of  extinc- 

spirit  from  the  religious  traditions.  In  the  case  of  the  more  quiet  and 
equable  development  of  the  Oriental  mind— so  tenacious  of  the  old— the 
opposition  between  the  mythic  religion  of  the  people  and  the  secret 
theosoplnc  doctrines  of  a  priestly  caste,  who  gave  direction  to  the  popular 
conscience,  might  exist  for  centuries  without  change.  But  among  the 
more  excitable  nations  of  the  West,  intellectual  culture,  as  soon  as  it 
attained  to  a  certain  degree  of  independence,  must  necessarily  fall  into 
collision  with  the  mythic  religion  handed  down  from  the  infancy  of  the 
people.”— Neander,  Church  Hist. .,  I.  6,  E.  T.  “  Le  repos  est  le  supplice 
de  l’Europ^en,  et  ce  caractere  contraste  merveilleusement  avec  l’immo- 
bilite  Orientale.” — De  Maistre,  (Euvres ,  p.  494.  “  Better,”  says  Tenny¬ 
son,  “  fifty  years  of  Europe  than  a  cycle  of  Cathay.” 

1  Draper,  Hist,  of  Intellectual  Development  in  Europe ,  I.  37. 

2  lb.,  I.  62.  Max  Midler,  Chips,  I.  220,  246. 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIOUS  SYSTEMS. 


3i 


tion,  practically  undistinguishable  from  a  declared 
Atheism.1 

§  9.  In  commencing  the  argument  of  these  Lee-  a  practi- 

cal  st^ncl" 

tures  (which,  it  will  be  remembered,  is  the  proof  of  ard  of 

belief 

the  truth  of  Christianity  arising  from  its  past  con-  assumed 
tinuity  and  tenacity,  and  from  its  indications  of  argument, 
ultimate  permanence),  I  assume  the  existence,  from 
the  earliest  days  of  the  Church,  of  a  nucleus  of  belief 
sufficient  to  produce  practical  effects.  On  the  other 
hand,  no  consensus  or  standing  uniformity  of  doc¬ 
trinal  opinion  is  demanded,  such  as  would  be  in 
small  accordance  with  the  laws  of  mental  progress 
in  other  subjects  under  the  varying  stages  of  early 
and  advanced  civilization,  and  national  differences 
of  climate  and  race.  While  the  original  of 
Christianity  can  only  be  accepted  as  divine,  it  is 
no  part  of  Christian  philosophy  to  except  the 
historical  development  of  the  faith  from  such  move¬ 
ments  of  the  human  mind  as  are  natural  to  its 
exercise  on  any  subject-matter  whatsoever.  Be-  How  far  , 

0  ,  .  .  guaranteed 

lievers  in  the  truths  of  the  Christian  religion  have in  the  ex- 

istence  of 

sometimes  been  described  in  terms  of  disparage-  the  Holy 

Scriptures, 

1  See  Tylor,  Prim.  Culture ,  II.  69,  and  compare  Dr.  Mozlej7,  Bampton 
Led.,  pp.  187,  368  :  “  The  Brahman  doctrine  of  the  final  state  professes 
some  difference  from  the  Buddhist ;  but  both  schools  maintain  in 
common  the  characteristic  of  impersonality  as  attaching  to  the  final 
state.”  See  also  Fairbairn  on  Belief  in  Immortality ,  pp.  50,  51,  53. 

Sir  H.  Maine,  Ancient  Law ,  p.  17,  observes  that  “  the  physical  confor¬ 
mation  of  Asiatic  countries  had  the  effect  of  making  individual  commu- 
nities  larger  and  more  numerous  than  in  the  West ;  and  it  is  a  known 
social  law  that  the  larger  the  space  over  which  a  particular  set  of  institu¬ 
tions  is  diffused,  the  greater  is  its  tenacity  and  vitality.” 


32 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST  [Lect.  I. 


ment  as  Bibliolaters,1  the  worshippers  of  a  book  and 
of  a  stereotyped  revelation.  It  is  not  necessary 
to  consider  to  what  portions  of  the  Church,  or  to 
what  theory  of  Christian  belief  this  criticism  is 
most  applicable.  But  it  is  by  no  means  true  that 
the  religion  of  Christ  is  contained  in  the  New 
Testament,  only  in  the  same  manner  as  the  Mosaic 
system  depended  on  the  Pentateuch,  or  as  Mahom- 
medanism  is  found  in  the  Koran,  or  the  faith  of 
Vishnu  or  Buddha  in  the  Vedas  or  the  Sutras. 
The  very  power  of  Christianity  lies  in  this :  that 
preaching  the  purest  morality  under  the  highest 
sanctions,  with  the  force  of  a  Divine  Exemplar, 
and  on  the  foundation  of  historic  facts,  it  never 
sacrifices  it  to  ceremonialism,  and  is  thus  superior 
to  the  decline  of  positive  forms.2  In  written  codes 

1  “  Bibliolatry  has  been,  and  is  long  likely  to  be,  the  bane  of  Pro¬ 
testant  Christianity.” — Hutton,  Essays ,  I.  142.  As  with  all  exaggera¬ 
tions,  this  contains  an  element  of  truth.  That  “  the  Bible  only  is  the 
religion  of  Protestants,”  was  the  dictum  of  Chillingworth. — (C.  iv.) 
“Protestantism,”  writes  Dr.  Dorner  {Hist.  Trot.  Theol .,  I.  2),  “seeks, 
indeed,  its  ultimate  foundation  in  the  nature  of  Christianity,  as  it  is 
handed  down  to  us  in  a  documentary  form  in  the  Holy  Scriptures.”  See 
some  good  remarks  on  this  subject  in  Rogers’  Essays ,  II.  334,  and  Dean 
Merivale’s  Lectures  on  Conversion  of  the  Empire ,  pp.  140,  141.  Chris¬ 
tians  are  known  to  Mahometans  as  “  the  people  of  the  Book.”  But  the 
vivid  language  of  Napoleon  at  St.  Helena  ( Bertrand’s  Memoirs  a p. 
Luthardt  Apol .,  p.  355,  E.  T.)  is  here  applicable,  “  The  Gospel  is 
no  mere  book,  but  a  living  creature  with  an  agency;  a  power  that 
conquers  all  that  opposes  it.” 

2  This  is  the  real  answer  to  objections  such  as  those  of  Mr.  Buckle, 
Ilist.  Civil .,  II.  51 :  “  The  actions  of  men  are  governed  not  by  dogmas, 
and  text-books,  and  rubrics,  but  by  the  opinions  and  habits  of  their 
contemporaries,  by  the  general  spirit  of  their  age,  and  by  the  character 
of  those  classes  who  are  in  the  ascendant.  This  seems  to  be  the  origin 


Lect.  I.] 


OF  RELIGTO  US  S  YSTEMS. 


33 


of  ceremonial  worship  and  practice,  it  is  difficult 
to  distinguish  between  principles  and  details,  so 
overlaid  is  the  spirit  by  the  letter  of  the  particular 
ordinance.  There  is  a  constant  tendency  to 
crystallize  into  formalism.  In  these  it  is  almost 
impossible  to  see  how  tradition  could  long  supply 
the  place  of  an  authorized  formula.  But  the  faith 
of  Jesus  Christ  makes,  as  it  requires,  no  such  claim. 
“  The  Gospel,”  it  has  been  truly  said,1  “is  not  a 
system  of  theology,  nor  a  syntagma  of  theoretical 
propositions  and  conclusions  for  the  enlargement  of 
speculative  knowledge,  ethical  or  metaphysical, 
but  it  is  a  history,  a  series  of  facts  or  events  related 
or  announced.  These  do  indeed  involve,  or  rather 
they  at  the  same  time  are,  most  important  doctrinal 
truths,  but  still  facts  and  declarations  of  facts.” 

of  that  difference  between  religious  theory  and  religious  practice  of  which 
theologians  greatly  complain  as  a  stumbling-block  and  an  evil.”— See 
Tylor,  Hist.  Prim.  Cult.,  II.  337.  Mr.  Mackay,  Progress  of  Intellect , 
I.  17,  remarks:  “Forms  (i.e.  creeds  and  ceremonies)  are  in  their 
nature  transitory ;  for,  being  destitute  of  flexibility  and  power  of  self¬ 
accommodation  to  altered  circumstances,  they  become  in  time  uncon- 
formable  to  realities,  and  stand  only  as  idle  landmarks  of  the  past,  or 
like  deserted  channels  requiring  to  be  filled  up.”  On  the  growth  of 
sacerdotalism  in  the  Vedic  religion  and  in  Buddhism,  see  Mr.  Fairbairn’s 
able  and  learned  essay,  Cont.  Rev.,  XX.  pp.  36-55. 

1  S.  T.  Coleridge,  Aids  to  Reflection,  p.  153.  “  Religions,”  says  Prof. 
Max  MUller,  “  have  sometimes  been  divided  into  national  or  traditional, 
as  distinguished  from  individual  or  statutable  religions.  The  former  are 
like  languages,  home-grown,  autochthonic,  without  an  historical  begin¬ 
ning)  generally  without  any  recognized  founder,  or  even  an  authorized 
code :  the  latter  have  been  founded  by  historical  persons,  generally  in 
antagonism  to  traditional  systems,  and  they  always  rest  on  the  authority 
of  a  written  code.”  This  division  Professor  Muller  with  justice  thinks 
too  sharply  drawn. —  C.  R.,  XIX.  102. 

D 


34 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST  [Lect.  I. 


and  in 

their 

special 

character 

istics. 


The  New  Testament  (if  with  one  exception)  may 
be  regarded  as  a  compilation  of  strictly  historical 
documents,  connected  together  by  what  might,  at 
first  sight,  seem  a  wholly  fortuitous  conjunction. 
Not  so,  however.  The  narrative  and  historical 
mould  in  which  the  Gospels,  Acts,  and  Epistles  are 
cast,  can  only  be  regarded  as  a  providential  feature,1 
differencing  at  once  the  authoritative  instruments 
of  the  religion  of  Christ  from  those  of  all  other 
systems.  Whatever  theory  of  biblical  inspiration 
be  adopted,  mechanical  or  dynamical,  it  will  hardly 
be  maintained  that  the  writings  of  the  New 
Testament  proceeded  like  the  syllables  of  Mahomet 
from  the  pen  of  an  archangel.2  It  may  be  held,  for 
example,  without  irreverence,  that  the  letters  of 
St.  Paul  would  have  been  worth  much  less  to  us 
if  they  had  not  been  called  forth  by  the  particular 
occasions  which  are  evident  in  each.  In  them  we 


1  “  Let  us  look  to  the  great  characteristic  of  our  holy  faith  ;  that 
unlike  all  other  assumed  religions  it  is  not  a  collection  of  mystic 
writings  presenting  to  the  view  of  man  the  scenes  and  the  events  of 
the  invisible  world  in  minute  description,  such  as  admits  no  test  from 
experience  and  the  course  of  the  world  ;  but  consists  in  those  very 
events  which  it  narrates,  and  out  of  which  it  is  evolved,  and  may  be 
tracked  continuously  through  more  than  three  thousand  years  in  the 
successive  periods  of  its  delivery  to  mankind ;  thus  occupying  a  large 
field  in  the  history  of  God’s  providence  ;  and  that  we  have  just  the 
same  ground  for  believing  its  truth  as  we  have  for  believing  any  other 
matter  of  history  equally  authenticated  by  events.” — Bp.  Hampden, 
Memorials ,  p.  221. 

2  Mi)  ovv  says  Africanus  finely  (ap.  Routh,  Bell.  Sacr .,  II.  229) 
KaTicofxfv  els  TO(ravTT)v  Qeoo-efieias  apiKpoXoylav,  iva  rf)  evaWayf)  twv 
uvo)iuT(tiv  tt)v  Xplarov  Baai\eiav  Kcii  iepcoavvrjv  (rvvLarcopev. 


Lect.  I.] 


OF  RELIGIOUS  SYSTEMS. 


35 


see  the  man  himself  dealing  with  men  whom  we  can 
see  likewise.  It  is  the  difference  between  a  portrait 
that  we  recognize  and  a  face  which  we  have  never 
seen,  or,  as  a  map  of  places  familiar  to  ns  by  the 
side  of  a  chart  of  countries  yet  unknown.  Such  is 
our  gain  in  holding  in  our  hands  the  letters  of  the 
living  man,  and  not  cold  abstract  articles  of  reli¬ 
gious  profession.  And  if  this  be  so  with  the 
Epistles,  how  much  more  with  the  life  of  Him, 
<c  Who  spake  as  never  man  spake  in  whose  acts 
and  words  is  centred  still  the  faith  of  Christendom.1 
Those  words,  “  the  primal,  indefeasible  truths  of 
Christianity,”  we  have  the  promise,  “  shall  never 
pass  away.”  In  the  imitation  of  His  life2  and 
spirit  lie  perennial  springs  of  endless  improvement 
and  advance.  “  All  true  moral  progress/’  it  has 
been  well  said,3  u  is  made  through  admiration,  and 
it  is  characteristic  of  our  religion  that  it  makes  a 
greater  use  of  example  than  any  other  system.” 
“  It  cannot  be  too  steadily  borne  in  memory,”  says 

1  It  is  strange  that  M.  Comte,  constantly  ignoring  Jesus  Christ, 
recognizes  Paul  as  the  meeting-point  of  Jew,  Greek,  and  Roman.  See 
Pol.  Pos.,  III.  409.  For  some  good  remarks  on  the  office  of  the  Bible 
in  prolonging  the  solidarity  of  the  life  of  Christ,  see  Mr.  Picton,  New 
Theories ,  &c.,  pp.  161-5. 

2  See  Milman,  Latin  Christianity ,  VI.  447.  Hence  perhaps  (with 
all  its  shortcomings)  the  boundless  popularity  and  influence  of  the 
‘  Imitatio  Christi.’  No  book  has  been  so  often  reprinted,  so  often 
translated,  or  into  so  many  languages. — 11).,  VI.  303.  It  is  a  remarkable 
fact  that  this  volume  was  a  favourite  one  with  A.  Comte  towards  the 
close  of  his  life. — Littre,  p.  586. 

3  By  Professor  Seeley,  Lectures  and  Essays,  p.  262.  See  also 
Hutton’s  Essays ,  I.  140. 

D  2 


Nature  of 
influence 
of  the  ex¬ 
ample  of 
Christ 
and  His 
Apostles. 


36 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST  [Lect.  I. 


another  living  writer,1  4  4  that  Christianity  is  Christ . 
So  He  taught ;  so  His  disciples  after  Him  ;  not  a 
law,  not  a  theory,  not  a  code  of  morals,  not  a  system 
of  casuistry,  not  even  an  elaborate  theology.  But 
they  ceased  not  to  teach  and  to  preach  Jesus  Christ.” 
“  Jesus,”  writes  Dr.  Newman,2  44  through  His 
preachers  imprinted  the  image  or  idea  of  Himself 
in  the  minds  of  His  subjects  ;  it  became  a  principle 
of  association  and  their  moral  life.  It  was  the 
instrument  of  their  conversion.”  Thus  (to  quote 
yet  one  other  author)  44  the  Platonist  exhorted  men 
to  imitate  God ;  the  Stoic  to  follow  reason.  It 
was  reserved  for  Christianity  to  present  to  the 
world  an  ideal  character  which,  through  all  the 
changes  of  eighteen  centuries,  has  inspired  the 
hearts  of  men  with  an  impassioned  love^  has  shown 
itself  capable  of  acting  on  all  ages,  nations,  tempera¬ 
ments  and  conditions,  which  has  been  not  only  the 
highest  pattern  of  virtue,  but  the  strongest  in¬ 
centive  to  its  practice,  and  has  exercised  so  deep  an 

The  Bishop  of  Ely,  Lect.  on  Christ’s  Influence  on  Uistovy ,  p.  17. 
So  also  Canon  Liddon  (Bampton  Lect.,  p.  308).  “Christianity,  as  a 
creed  and  as  a  life,  depends  absolutely  upon  the  personal  character  of 
its  founder.”  Coleridge,  Aids  to  Reflection ,  p.  288,  writes:  “In  the 
strictest  sense  of  essential,  this  alone  is  the  essential  in  Christianity, 
that  the  same  spirit  should  be  growing  in  us,  which  was  in  the  fulness 
of  all  perfection  in  Christ  Jesus.”  See  also  an  eloquent  passage  in 
Farrar’s  Witness  of  History  to  Christ,  p.  79. 

2  Grammar  of  Assent,  p.  460.  An  illustration  of  this  sentiment  may 
be  found  in  the  early  use  of  the  word  Kvpiaicos;  e.  g.  KvpiaKov  bCnrvov, 
KvptaKr]  ayici  rjpipa,  KvpiaKai  y paefreii,  to  KvpuiKov,  dominica  solennia. 

prjufTi  aaPftciTifrvTes,  aWa  Kara  KvpuiKtjv  far/v  £g>vt(s,  says  Ignatius,  ad 
Magnes.,  c.  ix. 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIO  US  S  Y STEMS. 


3  7 


% 


influence,  that  it  may  be  truly  said  that  the  simple 
record  of  three  short  years  of  active  life  has  done 
more  to  regenerate  and  soften  mankind  than  all  the 
disquisitions  of  philosophers  and  all  the  exhortations 
of  moralists.  This  has,  indeed,  been  the  well- 
spring  of  whatever  is  best  and  purest  in  the  Chris¬ 
tian  life.  In  the  character  and  example  of  its 
Founder,  Christianity  has  an  enduring  principle  of 
regeneration.”1 

S  io.  The  form  and  character  of  the  New  Tes- Relation  of 

#  #  Scripture 

tament  records  involve,  indeed,  the  consideration  of  to  the 

Creeds. 

their  relation  to  the  earliest  standards  of  doctrine.2 

1  Lecky,  Hist.  Eur.  Mot.,  II.  9,  and  see  Hist.  Rat.,  I.  337.  Thus  also 
Mr.  Carlyle,  Sartor  Resartus ,  p.  155.  “  If  thou  ask  to  what  height  man 
has  carried  it  in  this  manner,  look  on  our  Divinest  Symbol — on  Jesus  of 
Nazareth  and  his  life  and  his  biography,  and  what  followed  therefrom. 

Higher  has  the  human  thought  not  yet  reached :  this  is  Christianity 
and  Christendom  :  a  symbol  of  quite  perennial,  infinite  character ;  whose 
significance  will  ever  demand  to  be  anew  inquired  into  and  anew  made 
manifest.”  We  need  hardly  point  out  the  fallacy  and  evasion  which  is 
met  with  in  some  quarters,  of  admitting  to  the  full  the  perfectness  of 
Christ’s  moral  character  while  suppressing  its  supernatural  element. 

2  On  Creeds  as  a  peculiarity  of  Christianity,  see  Leibnitz,  Theodicee, 

Pref.  sub  init. :  on  their  employment  in  practice,  Neander,  0.  H.,  I.  420, 
who  connects  them  with  oral  traditions.  Dorner,  Hist.  Prot.  Tli.,  1. 12, 
remarks  on  the  tacit  growth  of  dogma.  “  In  order  to  a  development  of 
the  system  of  doctrine,  there  is  no  necessity  for  Councils  nor  for  the 
formal  fixing  of  the  dogma  by  a  positive  Canon.  The  opposite  is 
proved  by  the  three  first  centuries  of  the  Christian  Church,  in  which, 
without  oecumenical  synods,  the  progress  of  dogma  was  as  rapid  as  it 
was  sure  and  constant.  Never,  however,  was  dogma  created  or  con¬ 
stituted  truth  by  the  sanction  of  the  Church  in  a  juridical,  canonical 
form  :  but  on  the  contrary,  because  it  had  in  its  substance  established 
itself  in  the  common  faith,  there  followed  the  declarative  sanction.” 

See  also  Dr.  Newman’s  profound  and  just  observations,  Arians ,  c.  I.  §  ii., 
and  c.  II.  §  i. ;  Waterland,  Works ,  III.  254 ;  and  Dr.  Pusey’s  note  in 
Library  of  Fathers,  Tertullian,  p.  490. 


38 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST 


[Lect.  I. 


They  nowhere  claim  for  themselves  to  he  regarded 
as  precise  authoritative  statements  of  articles  of 
belief.  That  such  existed  in  very  early  times, 
probably  in  the  sub-apostolic  age,  seems  now  suffi¬ 
ciently  established.  The  want  of  creeds  must  have 
been  hardly  felt  in  the  lifetime  of  the  Apostles, 
whether  they  be  viewed  as  a  sacred  deposit,  or  tra¬ 
dition  of  Apostolic  teaching,  or  as  agglomerations 
of  doctrinal  expressions,  the  products  of  the 
earliest  controversies.  But  the  ultimate  and  co¬ 
ordinate  authority  of  the  written  word  remains 
beyond  question ;  being  proved  by  the  custom  of 
Scriptural  citation  found  even  in  the  Apostolical 
Fathers,  though  at  first,  as  was  natural,  employed 
much  more  largely  on  the  Old  than  upon  the  New 
Testament.1  From  the  first  there  would  seem  to 
have  existed  a  body  of  traditional  Apostolic  doc¬ 
trine,  according  with  the  tenor  of  Holy  Scripture 
and  forming  the  nucleus  of  later  and  more  ela¬ 
borate  Creeds.  We  are  concerned,  however,  only 
with  the  recognition  by  believers  from  Apostolic 
times  of  certain  revealed  truths,  and  of  historical 

1  Thus  Clemens  Romanus  quotes  profusely  from  the  Old  Testament, 
but  rarely  from  the  New  (i.  e.  from  the  words  of  Christ).  See  c.  xiii. 
In  the  Second  Epistle,  however,  the  New  Testament  quotations  are 
frequent,  and  apparently  from  Apocryphal  Gospels.  One  reason  for  this 
practice  may  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the  Gentile  converts  would 
commonly  be  ignorant  of  the  Sacred  writings,  while,  at  the  same  time, 
their  antiquity,  authority,  and  testifying  power  would  be  strongly  felt. 
Thus  the  Apostles  proved  both  for  Gentile  and  Jew  out  of  the  Old 
Testament,  applying  the  evidence  of  prophecy  by  the  side  of  direct 
testimony. 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIO  US  S  Y STEMS. 


39 


events  embodying  these  truths  which  contained 
implicit  obligations  of  a  practical  kind.  In  this 
way  a  fixed  character  was  impressed  on  the  re-^et[veon 
ligion  itself,  and  on  its  followers,  sufficient  in  the  Practlce- 
aggregate  to  produce  distinct  effects.  “  The  growth 
of  Christian  faith  became  a  permanent  and  here¬ 
ditary  belief  by  a  natural  law  of  transmission.”  1 
Thus  we  might  argue  either  from  the  contents  of 
the  New  Testament,  together  with  the  Creeds,  to 
the  lives  of  believers,  as  exemplifying  and  verify¬ 
ing  the  nature  of  the  doctrines  believed ;  or  in- 
verselv  from  the  life  and  character  of  believers,  we 

t/ 

may  argue  up  to  the  character  of  the  truths  be¬ 
lieved.  In  either  case  it  must  be  admitted  that 
the  first  ages  of  a  faith  are  those  in  which  its  tenets 
are  most  enthusiastically  received  and  vigorously 
acted  on,  and  which  therefore  exhibit  most  plainly 
the  tendencies  and  characteristics  of  the  system.2  The 
emotions  are  stirred  rather  than  the  intellect ;  and 
it  is  with  these  that  religion,  as  a  motive  power 
among  men,  is  principally  concerned.  But  further, 
by  the  aid  of  the  Canon  of  Holy  Scripture,  cau¬ 
tiously  framed,  gradually  accepted  and  transmitted 
to  after-times,3  the  personal  influence,  which  marked 


1  Dr.  Mozley,  Bampton  Lect.,  p.  140. 

2  “  The  life  of  intense  hope,”  says  Mr.  Goldwin  Smith,  with  his  accus¬ 
tomed  beauty  and  strength  of  expression,  “  that  is  lived  in  the  morning 
of  all  great  revolutions,  may  partly  make  up  for  the  danger,  the  distress, 
the  disappointment  of  their  later  hour.” — Lect.,  p.  59. 

3  Pascal,  speaking  of  the  Old  Testament,  says  :  “  C’est  le  plus  ancien 


40 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST  [Lect.  I. 


the  primary  records  of  Christian  truth,  was  in¬ 
definitely  extended  and  conveyed  with  individual 
force  to  succeeding  generations.  And  here  the 

Permanent  importance  of  the  form  in  which  the  New  Testa- 

influence  1 

conse-  ment  was  composed,  becomes  still  more  apparent. 

quent  on  -p,  .  .  , 

the  form  of  r  or  it  is  such  as  to  guarantee  permanence.  The 

Testament.  influences  of  the  Gospel  in  the  example  and  oral 
teachings  of  Christ  and  His  Apostles  are  brought 
to  bear  continuously  on  successive  ages  in  a  degree 
much  greater  than  could  have  been  achieved  by  the 
bare  institutions  of  ceremonies,  however  significant, 
or  the  enunciation  of  abstract  doctrines,  however 
pregnant  with  principles  of  action.  The  flexibility 
and  power  of  self-accommodation  essential  to  a 
religion  destined  for  perpetuity  are  thus  secured. 
In  this  manner,  also,  fundamental  departures  from 
the  pure  spirit  of  pristine  Christianity  have  ever 
retained  their  antidote  with  them.  For  they  have 
all  along  held  firm  to  the  Canon  of  Scripture,  by 


which  accordingly  they  may  be  tested  and  purged. 
In  this  fact,  and  not  in  any  single  doctrine  of  “jus¬ 
tification  by  faith  only”  lay  the  true  value  of  the 
Reformation  as  an  ecclesiastical  movement.1  Print- 


livre  du  monde,  et  le  plus  authentique  ;  et  au  lieu  que  Mahomet,  pour 
faire  subsister  le  sien,  a  defendu  de  le  lire  ;  Moise,  pour  faire  subsister  le 
sien,  a  ordonne  a  tout  le  monde  de  le  lire.” — Pensees ,  II.  186. 

1  It  has  hence  been  called  “  the  resurrection  of  the  Bible.” — Compare 
Ha  11am,  Literature  of  K,  I.  iv.  §  58  ;  Lecky,  II.  Bat.,  II.  227  ;  Milman, 
Hist.  Latin  Chr .,  VI.  438.  Mr.  Hutton,  Essays ,  I.  400,  takes  a  different 
view;  but  see  also  p.  415.  Erasmus,  De  Ratione  Verce  Thcologue, 
p.  87,  says :  “  Non  paucos  vidimus  olim  Lutetiie,  quibus  si  quid  depro- 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIOUS  SYSTEMS. 


4i 


in g  restored  the  authority  and  efficacy  of  the 
Bible,  which  in  dark  ages  inevitably  succumbed  to 
tradition.  Is  there  any  other  example,  we  may 
ask,  of  a  religion  surviving  and  drawing  fresh 
strength  from  the  resurrection  of  its  original  re¬ 
cords?  I  do  not  desire  to  deny  that  some  periods 
or  conditions  of  society  may  be  more  receptive  of 
one  sort  of  teaching  than  another.  And  the  same 
law  may  hold  good  in  respect  of  individual  tem¬ 
perament.  Thus  the  medieval  ages  of  Christianity 
were  bound  together  by  ceremonial  uniformity 
and  a  ceremonial  faith,  perhaps  essential  to  a 

svstem  of  centralization  such  as  alone  could  evict 

%/ 

and  control  the  evils  of  surrounding  barbarism. 

But  with  the  Reformation  the  Church  returned 
at  least  in  part  to  its  early  appreciation  of  moral 
and  spiritual  truths,  and  to  a  Scriptural  Chris¬ 
tianity  as  their  best  and  most  permanent  expression. 

§11.  It  should  perhaps  be  considered  how  far  a  Objection 
theory  of  development  tends  to  undermine  an“«® 
argument  resting  on  the  persistence  of  Christian  ^nstiaiv- 
doctrine.  It  could  not,  indeed,  be  viewed  as  fatal  from  the 

7  #  theory  01 

to  it,  except  the  identity  of  the  religion  itself  were  doctrinal 

•  t  j  ment. 

mendum  fuisset  ex  Paulo,  videbantur  sibi  prorsus  in  ahum  mundum 
translati and  Robert  Stephens  (op.  Oieseler,  V.  57,  E.  T.)  wrote  in  his 
own  defence,  “Ante  paucos  annos  cpiidam  ex  Sorbona  sic  loquebatur . 
miror  quid  isti  juvenes  nobis  semper  allegent  novum  testamentum. 

Per  Deum  ego  plus  habebam  quam  quinquaginta  annos  quod  nesciebam, 
quod  esset  novum  testamentum.”  The  doctrine  of  a  “  depositum  fidei 
is  not  necessarily  opposed  to  all  attempts  to  seek  out  the  truth.  I  his, 
no  doubt,  may  become  incrusted,  and  need  to  be  reburnished. 


42 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST  [Lect.  I. 


compromised ;  and  this  would  be  contended  for 
but  by  few.  In  the  case  supposed  it  would  not  be 
one  Gospel,  but  many,  which  has  been  preached 
throughout  the  world.  The  introduction  of  par¬ 
ticular  doctrines  unknown  to  the  first  ages  of  the 
Church  has  certainly  exercised  an  important 
practical  influence  on  the  history  of  Christianity. 
But  if  it  should  appear  that  the  simplicity  of  the 
faith  has  outlived  these  and  similar  importations, 
and  through  its  native  purity  still  works  its  own 
work  upon  mankind,  then  the  line  of  proof 
survives,  and  an  additional  evidence  is  secured  for 
its  inherent  sanctity,  its  Divine  origin,  and  its 

insuffi-  imperishable  permanence.  It  would,  no  doubt,  be 

ciency  of  . 

this  theory,  possible  to  maintain  upon  a  theory  of  doctrinal 
evolution  the  progressive  unity  of  Christian  truth, 
together  with  the  continuity  of  its  ideas,  and  so  to 
lay  claim  to  the  effects  of  the  system  as  flowing 
from  a  single  source.  The  difficulty  lies  in  re¬ 
conciling  the  theory  with  the  facts.  The  coldness 
with  which  it  has  been  received  in  the  house  of  its 
friends  throws  a  just  suspicion  upon  its  demands.1 
A  system  of  development,  however,  necessarily 

1  “  Rome  founds  herself  upon  the  idea  that  to  her  by  tradition  and 
exclusive  privilege  was  communicated  once  for  all  the  whole  truth  from 
the  beginning.  Mr.  Newman  lays  his  corner-stone  in  the  very  opposite 
idea  of  a  gradual  development  given  to  Christianity  by  the  motion  of 
time,  by  experience,  by  expanding  occasions,  and  by  the  progress  of 
civilization.” — De  Quincey,  Essay  on  Protestantism.  On  this  subject  see 
Dr.  Mill’s  Five  Sermons ,  Serm.  I.,  and  for  the  view  of  the  Eastern 
Church,  compare  Dean  Stanley,  pp.  42,  173. 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIOUS  SYSTEMS. 


43 


renounces  the  appeal  to  antiquity  or  uniform 
tradition.  This  is  replaced  by  a  different  principle, 
viz.  of  authority.  It  assumes  the  variation  of 
doctrine  for  which  it  would  account.  It  renounces, 
therefore  (a  fact  of  especial  importance  in  the 
present  argument)  that  element  of  permanence 
which,  we  contend,  is  a  marked  chaiactenstic  of 
Christianity.  It  cannot  then  lay  any  claim  on 
behalf  of  the  religion  of  Christ  to  effects  as  the 
results  of  its  character  and  doctrines.  In  other 
words,  the  sort  of  permanence  which  it  affects 
is  fictitious  and  of  an  arbitrary  kind.  But  there  is  patibility 
further  as  little  limit  in  this  view  of  the  subject  with  fixed- 
as  respects  steadfastness  of  doctrine  on  the  side  of  doctrine, 
the  future  as  in  the  past.  The  Christianity  of  the 
future  might  require  another  name.  Nor  can  the 
ultimate  aspect  or  effects  of  our  religion  he  pre¬ 
dicted  with  any  attempt  at  precision  undei  such 

a  system. 

§  12.  But  it  may  he  said,  while  rejecting  the 
theory  of  development  as  an  adequate  explanation 
of  facts,  it  must  still  be  admitted  that  the  facts  re¬ 
main  ;  and  it  is  these  which  may  be  held  to  break  off 
the  continuity,  as  they  undoubtedly  do,  the  sim¬ 
plicity  of  the  faith  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus.  In  this  founjs  his- 
matter  a  distinction  has  been  introduced  between  ruptions 
identity  of  principle  and  identity  of  doctrine  thoritative 

beliefs. 

1  Newman,  Essay  on  Development ,  I.  iii.  §  4,  p.  70:  Piinciples  aie 
abstract  and  general,  doctrines  relate  to  facts;  doctrines  develope,  an 


44 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST  [Lect.  I. 


With  this,  indeed,  we  are  not  now  concerned,  the 
former  being  sufficient  for  our  purpose.  But 
the  historical  development  of  Christianity  is  one 
thing,  its  doctrinal  unity  another.  This  develop¬ 
ment  may  be  presumed  to  he  subordinate  to  a 
system  of  law  and  general  evolution,  similar  to 
the  progress  of  all  philosophical  thought.  It  is 
the  idea  of  such  a  development  as  this,  subject, 
indeed,  to  a  secondary  process  of  degradation,  due 
to  the  mingled  presence  of  lower  and  higher  ele¬ 
ments  in  man’s  nature,  of  corruption  and  perfecti¬ 
bility,  which,  as  has  been  truly  said,1  “  gives  a 
continuity  to  any  distinct  account  of  the  progress 
of  Christendom,  a  life  to  any  intelligent  analysis 

principles  do  not ;  doctrines  grow,  and  are  enlarged,  principles  are  illus¬ 
trated  ;  doctrines  are  intellectual,  and  principles  are  more  immediately 
ethical  and  practical.  Systems  live  in  principles  and  represent  doctrines.” 
See  some  excellent  remarks  on  this  subject  in  Canon  Kobertson’s  Hist,  of 
Chr.  Cli.,  I.  pp.  82,  91.  Dollinger,  First  Age  of  the  Church ,  I.  228-233, 
leans  too  far  to  the  side  of  development,  confounding  an  original  tradition 
of  doctrine  (which  seems  necessary  and  reasonable)  with  a  continuous 
one,  which  it  was  the  object  of  Creeds  and  of  the  Canon  of  Scripture  to 
obviate.  Thus  Augustine’s  rule  is  a  positive  one :  “  Nec  ego  Nicasnum  nec 
tu  debes  Ariminense  tanquam  prayudicaturus  proferre  concilium :  nec 
ego  hujus  auctoritate,  nec  tu  illius  detineris :  Scripturarum  auctorita- 
tibus,  non  quorumque  propriis,  sed  utriusque  communibus  testibus,  res 
cum  re,  causa  cum  causa,  ratio  cum  ratione  eoncertet.” — c.  Maximin. 
Ar.,  II.  xiv.  3. 

1  Dean  Stanley,  Essays ,  pp.  465,  470.  So  Ozanam,  Civilis.  Chret.,  I. 
22,  E.  T. :  “  Every  great  era  of  history  takes  its  departure  from  ruin 
and  ends  in  a  conquest.”  On  the  fact  that  aipeais  alpeaLv  (fivTevei,  “  post- 
liumi  haeresium  filii,”  see  Bacon,  Works,  ed.  Spedding,  VIII.  83.  De 
Quincey,  Ess.  on  Protest.,  admits  three  kinds  of  development  in  doc¬ 
trine — (1),  philological;  (2),  philosophical,  from  advance  in  knowledge; 
(3),  moral  and  historical ;  Christianity  awaking  new  powers  in  man,  and 
being  itself  modified  by  times  and  climes. 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIO  US  S  YSTEMS. 


45 


of  Creeds  and  articles.  In  this  manner  the  theo¬ 
logy,  like  the  architecture  of  each  age,  has  always 
built  itself  upon  the  ruins  of  its  predecessors/’  It 
is  like  a  tree  drawing  its  growth  from  its  own 
dead  leaves.  It  is  this,  in  fact,  which  constitutes 
the  solidarity  of  human  history,  and  of  the  laws 
which  compose  it,  which  enables  it  to  he  treated 
philosophically,  if  not  scientifically.  It  has  plainly 
been  the  will  of  Grod  that  in  the  examination  and 
handling  of  Divine  truth  the  human  element 
should  not  remain  free  from  controversial  doubt 
and  absolute  error.  The  hand  of  God  is  manifest 
here,  as  in  other  examples  of  His  superintending 
providence.  It  has  been  finely  said,  u  He  never 
yet  sent  a  gift  into  the  world,  which  man  did  not 
deteriorate  in  the  using.”1  Whatever  he  the  immunity 
extent  of  His  promise  to  His  Church  at  large,  as  nowhere 

1  i  i  i  •  l  promised 

regards  indemnity  from  error  ;  whether  this  apply  totoe 
to  all  degrees  of  it,  both  in  principle  and  practice ; 
yet  for  each  individual  Church  no  such  immunity 
can  he  pleaded,  any  more  than  from  corruptions 
in  manner  of  living.2 3  But  unless  it  can  be  shown 
that,  of  the  larger  and  dominant  divisions  of  the 
Christian  Church  any  have  cut  themselves  off 
from  the  essentials  of  primitive  teaching,  from 
all  that  is  vital  to  the  unity  of  the  faith  ;  the 

1  Archer  Butler,  Lectures  on  Romanism ,  p.  61.  See  also  pp.  288—9, 

316-18. 

3  See  Field,  Of  the  Church ,  Book  IV.  c.  v. 


46 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST 


[Lect.  I. 


active  power  of  Christ’s  religion  may,  though 
various,  be  still  regarded  as  uniform  in  its  opera¬ 
tion,  and  definite  in  its  effects. 

A  ration-  &ii.  But  there  is  another  side  to  a  theorv  of 

alistic  de-  ^  #  .  . 

velopment  development  which  demands  consideration.  It  is 

likewise  ...  ,  ,  , 

fatal  to  the  that  which,  looking  at  Christianity  on  the  whole 

nence  of  as  merely  a  stage  of  progress  in  the  human  mind, 

Christian  —  i«  -1-1  -i  •  •  .  .  i  *1 

belief.  and  regarding  ail  religious  truth  as  necessarily 
progressive,1  because  man’s  powers  are  so,  while 
accounting  for  its  rise,  prognosticates  its  fall.  This 
system  of  thought  strikes,  indeed,  at  the  very  root 
of  any  defence  of  our  holy  religion  which  rests 
upon  the  permanent  character  of  its  teaching. 
An  eclectic  Christianity,  making  up  a  cento  of 
doctrines  and  precepts,  would  undertake  to  dis¬ 
tinguish  between  the  permanent  and  the  tempo¬ 
rary,  the  universal  and  the  partial  elements  of  the 
teaching  of  Christ.  Thus  particular  doctrines  are 
rejected  as  forming  no  part  of  the  Christian  con¬ 
sciousness,  and  are  yielded,  as  a  sacrifice,  to  the 
speculative  difficulties  of  the  time.2  We  cannot, 
however,  accept,  we  can  only  repudiate  and 
challenge  all  asserted  improvements  whether  by 
substitution  or  omission,  in  the  subject-matter  of 


1  Mr.  Buckle,  H.  Civ.,  II.  21,  fathers  this  view  on  Charron.  It  was 
carried  on  by  Hume  in  his  Natural  History  of  Religion ,  but  has  reached 
its  climax  in  the  s}rstem  of  M.  Comte. 

2  See  Dean  Mansel’s  Bampton  Led.,  pp.  250,  258 ;  Palmer  On  the 
Dodrine  of  Development,  pp.  91-100 ;  Dewar  on  German  Protest,  p.  196  ; 
Blanco  White,  Life,  III.  77. 


Lect.  L]  OF  RELIGIOUS  SYSTEMS. 


47 


Christianity  itself,  effected  by  alleged  advances  in 
knowledge  and  civilization.  The  progress  of 
science,  so  far  as  it  extends  to  religion,  touches 
it  on  its  natural  or  moral  side :  not  as  it  is  a 
revelation  of  spiritual  truths.  These,  simple  in 
their  character,  are  also  final,  and  admit  of  no 
rationalizing  process  of  accommodation  to  a  fancied 
advance  in  knowledge.  Obviously,  there  can  be 
no  progress  of  this  character  in  regard  of  truths 
which  human  reason  is  incapable  of  discovering 
for  itself.  In  this  respect  the  religion  of  Christ  is 
really  stationary.  Civilization  and  knowledge 
may  be  regarded  as  witnesses  to  the  permanent 
character  of  Christian  truth,  which  absorbs,  appro¬ 
priates,  and  assimilates  them  without  detriment  to 
its  own  announcements.  In  a  certain  sense  they 
form  part  of  that  natural  revelation  of  Himself  and 
His  dealings  with  mankind  which  is  a  necessary 
consequence  of  a  Divine  government  of  the  world, 
and  which  supplements  His  more  special  manifes-  T1ys  wil1 

L  L  x  be  further 

tations.  Those  improvements,  however,  in  the  treated, 
condition  and  destinies  of  man  which  are  due  to 
the  particular  operation  of  Christianity,  form  part 
of  the  proper  subject-matter  of  these  Lectures,  and 
will  be  adverted  to  in  the  course  of  them. 

§  14.  It  may  perhaps  be  thought  that  as  he  who  ^aes°tnesr. 
excuses  himself  and  his  own  cause,  in  effect  [ns on  the 
becomes  the  accuser ;  so  there  is  a  certain  want  argument, 
of  confidence  in  the  credentials  of  Christianity, 


48 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST 


[Lect.  I. 


when  it  is  consented  to  weigh  the  probabilities  of 
its  duration.  It  is  enough  to  reply  that  the  form 
assumed,  and  the  direction  taken  by  the  contro¬ 
versies  of  an  age  depend,  doubtless,  upon  laws  of 
thought  beyond  our  volition  or  control.  The 
course  of  Christian  defence  must  ever  follow  that 
of  attack ;  and  arguments  which  in  one  age  are 
satisfactory  enough^  in  another  fall  pointless  and 
beside  the  mark.  There  is,  then,  a  duty  which 
belongs  to  the  Church  of  God  in  every  age  and  to 

Duty  of  tt  watchmen  ”  in  every  generation,  which  may 

teachers  J  0  7  ^ 

of  Chris-  pe  described  as  the  discerning  of  the  signs  of  the 
times.  Much  of  the  influence,  much  of  the  use¬ 
fulness  of  individual  ministers  of  religion,  will 
always  depend  on  their  appreciation  of  the  needs 
and  tendencies  of  the  day.1  Much  of  the  narrow¬ 
ness  of  thought  and  want  of  practical  knowledge 
which  has  been  falsely,  because  extravagantly, 
attributed  to  the  clerical  mind,  has  been  due  to 
this; — an  absence  of  clear-sightedness  in  appre¬ 
hending  the  intellectual  posture  of  the  age,  its 
information  and  particular  bent  of  thought. 
“  Watchman,  what  of  the  night?  Watchman, 
what  of  the  night  ?  ”  must  still  be  our  question, 
when  the  clouds  of  doubt  are  hanging  low,  and 
the  darkness  of  unbelief  seems  settling  on  the 
horizon  of  faith.  It  is  not  always  sunshine  in  the 
courts  of  the  Lord’s  house  at  Jerusalem.  Rather 


1  See  some  interesting  remarks  of  Mr.  Lecky,  Ilist.  Eat.,  I.  123. 


Lect.  I.] 


OF  RELIGIOUS  SYSTEMS. 


49 


the  answer  is  re-echoed  from  the  towers  of  observa¬ 
tion  and  the  ramparts  of  defence.  “  The  morning 
cometh,  but  also  the  night.  If  ye  will  inquire, 
inquire  ye  ;  return,  come.” 1  It  cannot  be  the 
part  of  Christian  wisdom  to  refuse  the  labour  of 
accommodating  its  teaching  to  the  requirements  of 
existing  knowledge,  and  of  anticipating,  so  far 
as  it  may,  the  difficulties  of  present  thinkers.  It  ImpoT, 
needs  but  little  insight  into  the  course  of  specula-  present 

.  #  ^  1  crisis. 

tion  at  this  time  to  estimate  the  direction  of  the 
conflict  which  must  henceforward  be  considered 
inevitable,  between  Science  and  Faith.  The  op¬ 
position  and  repugnancy  which  in  former  days 
were  more  speculative  than  practical,  now  show 
themselves  immediate  and  direct,  and  are  pushed 
into  minute  details.  The  question  is  fast  becom¬ 
ing  one  of  mutual  compatibility.  But  there  is 
comfort  in  the  manliness  with  which  the  chal¬ 
lenge  has  been  accepted  on  the  side  of  Christian  Grounds  of 
belief.  Unworthy  suspicions  of  the  candour  of  ness, 
opponents,  unwarrantable  confusion  of  intellectual 
with  moral  error ;  illogical  estimates  of  the  con¬ 
sequences  of  unsound  opinions,2  are  fast  being  laid 
aside.  The  supreme  obligation  due  to  truth  is 
everywhere  acknowledged.  It  is  seen  that  the 

1  Isaiah  xxi.  11,  12. 

In  the  tieatment  of  Holy  Scripture  (it  has  heen  well  observed), 
theie  is  an  abatement  of  that  most  wild  and  pernicious  line  of  defence 
which  may  be  called  the  *  all-or-nothing  principle5:  because  it  poises 
the  vast  and  glorious  edifice  of  Revealed  truth  upon  the  point  of  a  single 

E 


50 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST 


[Lect.  I. 


cause  at  stake  is  the  cause  of  all,  and  not  of  a 
class ;  and  those  who  make  or  rather  find  the 
difficulties  which  threaten  to  divorce  Faith  from 
Science,  are  now  credited  with  a  willingness  to 
join  in  the  work  of  subduing  them.  On  the  other 
hand,  there  is  in  many  respects  a  kindlier  feeling 
stirring  in  the  antagonists  of  dogmatic  belief 
towards  their  opponents.  The  services  and  bene¬ 
fits  of  Christian  teaching  in  the  history  of  mankind 
are  more  largely  understood.  It  is  acknowledged 
that  there  is  something,  at  least,  to  be  said  for  the 
claims  of  Christianity ;  nor  are  its  professors 
merely  the  ready  instruments  of  credulity  and 
imposture.  There  is  comfort,  too,  when  con¬ 
fronted  by  an  intellectual  revolution  in  the  scien¬ 
tific  temper  of  the  age,  in  the  retrospect  of  past 
dangers  and  past  escapes.  “  The  centre  of  gravity 
of  religious  questions,”  it  has  been  eloquently  said 
from  this  place,  “  may  have  become  altogether 
shifted  and  displaced.  Anchors  are  lifting  every¬ 
where,  and  men  committing  themselves  to  what 
they  may  meet  with  on  the  sea.  But  Christians 
have  had  bad  days  before”1  “Passi  graviora” 
may  then  well  be  for  the  time  to  come  the  watch¬ 
word  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  We  are  not  enter- 

incidental  statement  of  some  fact  either  of  history  or  science,  and  then 
declares,  with  an  audacity  which  makes  one  shudder,  that  if  that 
single  statement  can  he  disproved,  the  whole  structure  must  fall  to  the 
ground.” — Christian  Remembrancer ,  Vol.  L1V.  p.  132. 

1  Dean  Church,  XJniv.  Sermons ,  Serm.  IV. 


Lect.  I.]  OF  RELIGIOUS  SYSTEMS. 


5i 

ing  for  the  first  time  on  the  encounter  with 
Materialism  or  with  secular  modes  of  thought. 

At  present,  certainly,  the  tone  and  feeling  of 
society  is  not  anti-Christian  :  it  only  needs  to  be 
reassured.  We  are  not  entering  on  a  conflict 
unexpected,  unforeseen.  He  who  came  “not  to 
send  peace  upon  the  earth  but  a  sword,”  has  with 
that  sword,  “even  the  Word  of  Hod,”  armed  His 
warriors  for  the  fight  of  Christian  truth  with 
human  imperfection.1  We  are  contending  for  a  Elements 
faith  which  from  the  first  has  been  the  religion  nenceTn-' 
of  progress:2  whose  cardinal  doctrine  is  the  love  IhTrc- m 
of  our  kind,  the  source  of  all  just  and  enduring  chust°f 
liberty  :3  which  has  been  ever  the  enemy  of  social 
injustice  :  which  in  nowise  denies  the  unity  of 
the  human  race  and  is  confined  to  no  one  clime, 
to  no  one  tribal  division  of  mankind,  Aryan 
or  Semitic,  to  no  one  form  of  political  constitu¬ 
tion  :4  and  which  in  its  deep  sense  of  human 

1  See  M.  Guizot,  Meditations ,  Yol.  I.  p.  xx. 

2  This  is  admitted  by  M.  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  IV.  231,  and  comp. 

Dean  Merivale,  Lect.  on  Conversion  of  the  Empire,  p.  210;  also  Guizot. 

Civ.  in  Europe ,  I.  94,  ed.  Bohn  ;  Ozanam,  Civil,  in  Fifth  Cent.,  I.  4,  E.  T. ; 

Lecky,  Hist.  Rat.,  II.  234-5. 

3  Professor  Gold  win  Smith,  Study  of  History,  Pref. 

4  Thus  Cardinal  Wiseman,  Lect.  on  Science  and  Religion ;  Ffoulkes, 

Div.  Christendom,  p.  247.  “Christianity  alone  has  a  definite  message 
addressed  to  all  mankind.  The  character  of  the  teaching  of  Mahomet 
is  too  exact  a  reflection  of  the  race,  time,  place,  and  climate  in  which  it 
aiose  to  admit  of  its  being  universal.  The  same  objection  applies  to 
the  religions  of  the  far  East,”  &c.- — Dr.  Newman,  Oram,  of  Assent, 
p.  425.  “  Christianity  is  a  living  truth  which  never  can  grow  old,”  &c. 

— lb.,  p.  480. 


52 


PERMANENCE  A  TEST. 


[Lect.  I. 

responsibility  has  been  the  handmaid  of  man’s 
perfectibility,  leading  him  up  to  “  the  fulness  of 
the  stature  of  Christ.”  We  are  contending  for  a 
faith  which  claims  to  be  coeval  with  the  powers, 
the  wants,  the  destinies  of  human  nature  :  which 
alone  is  potent  in  virtue  of  Christ’s  Mediation 
to  heal  the  wounds  of  conscience  and  dry  the  tears 
of  sin :  which  has  extended  our  very  conceptions 
of  purity  and  holiness,  as  possible  to  man :  and 
which  alone  satisfies  the  boundless  yearnings  of 
his  spirit  by  filling  it  with  the  promise  of  the 
likeness  of  its  God.  Why  should  we  not  assert 
for  such  a  religion  as  this,  the  living  germs  of 
permanence  and  truth,  a  vitality  surviving  modifi¬ 
cation,  a  vigour  which  can  never  decay,  a  life 
immortal  as  the-  soul  for  which  it  lives  and 
works  ? 1 

Meyas  iv  ra vtyj  ©cos,  ovSe  yrjpacn<€L. 

1  “  Nemo  dubitat  eum  qui  veram  religionem  requirit,  ant  jam  credere 
immortalem  esse  animam,  cni  prosit  ilia  religio,  ant  etiam  id  ipsnm  in 
eftdem  religione  velle  in  venire.  Animas  igitur  cansa  omnis  religio. 

.  .  Animas  cansa  vel  solius  vel  maxime  vera,  si  qna  est  religio,  con- 
stituta  est.” — Angnstin.  de  TJtilit.  Cred.,  c.  vii. 


LECTURE  II. 

OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

CONSIDERED. 


C’est  un  vieux  batiment :  si  on  y  touche,  il  croulera. 

“  Je  suis  done  tres-dispose  h  croire  que  chez  des  hommes  que  ceux  qui 
m’entendent  l’instinct  secret  devinera  juste  assez  souvent  meme  dans  les 
sciences  naturelles.  Mais  je  suis  porte  a  le  croire  a  peu  pr£s  infaillible 
lorsqu’il  s’agit  de  philosophic  rationnelle,  de  morale,  de  metaphysique 
et  de  theologie  naturelle.” 


De  Maistre,  Soirees ,  lcr  Entret. 


LECTURE  II. 


“  If  thou  sayest,  Behold  we  knew  it  not :  doth  not  He  that  pon¬ 
der eth  the  heart ,  consider  it  ?  and  He  that  keepeth  thy  soul ,  doth 
not  He  know  it  ?  and  shall  not  He  render  to  every  man  according 
to  his  works! — ]{9roi).  jcjctb,.  12. 


§  1.  1L  TEt  have  been  hitherto  occupied  with  the 
*  *  consideration  of  permanence  as  a  crite¬ 
rion  of  truth,  and  the  conditions  of  its  applicability 
to  the  Grospel  of  J esus  Christ.  Christianity,  we  con¬ 
tend,  is  the  only  religion  which  has  stood  its  ground, 
which  has  taken  part  in  the  general  advance  of 
modern  civilization  as  represented  by  the  nations 
of  Europe,  the  foremost  portion  of  mankind. 
There  is,  then,  good  reason  to  believe  that  it  must 
be  true,  and  will  prove  to  be  an  accompaniment  of 
human  progress  to  the  end.  The  argument  thus 
afforded  to  its  claims  to  reception  is  laid  on  grounds 
which  are  common  to  any  religious  system.  It 
does  not,  then,  rest  principally,  or  in  the  first 
instance,  on  the  contents  of  the  religion  as  revealed. 
These,  however  cogent  to  the  mind  of  the  believer, 
can  have  no  binding  force  in  relation  to  an  ob¬ 
jector.  To  all  who  accept  the  faith  of  Christ  it 
must  be  plain  enough,  that  our  holy  religion  can 
be  no  passing  phase  of  thought  or  sentiment  in  the 


The  past 
history  of 
Christi¬ 
anity  a 
ground  for 
believing 
in  its  per¬ 
manence. 


This  argu¬ 
ment,  in¬ 
dependent 
of  the  par¬ 
ticular 


56 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


contents 
the  reli¬ 
gion, 


history  of  the  human  race,  to  be  succeeded  by 
others  equally  ephemeral.  If  true,  it  is  true  for 
eternity.  It  has  closed  the  roll  and  completed 
the  career  of  the  religions  of  mankind.1  Christ, 
if  He  be  Christ,  is  “  with  His  Church  always, 
even  unto  “  the  end  of  the  world.”2  Incarnation, 
Redemption,  Regeneration,  Sanctification,  are  no 
catchwords  of  sect  or  school.  They  connote  facts 
touching  the  destinies  of  the  whole  race  of  man. 
Nor  can  Christianity  be  regarded  only  as  a  revela¬ 
tion  of  doctrine.3  It  is  far  more  a  Divine  work  of 
restoration :  in  this  lies  its  proper  characteristic. 
“  There  is  one  Mediator  ”  (and  but  one)  “  between 
God  and  man,  the  Man  Christ  Jesus.”4  “  This 
faith  was  once  ”  (and  once  for  all)  “  delivered  to 
the  Saints.”5  “No  man  may  deliver  his  brother, 
nor  make  agreement  unto  God  for  him.  For  it 

1  “  Le  Christianisme  a  ferm4  la  carrie  re  ties  religions  ....  parce  qu’elle 
est  la  seule  parfaitement  digne  de  l’homme,  d’ou  il  suit  par  une  conse¬ 
quence  neeessaire  qu’elle  est  la  plus  parfaite  et  la  derniere  ties  religions.” 
— Saisset,  Essais ,  p.  300. 

2  Matt,  xxviii.  20. 

3  See  some  excellent  remarks  in  Dorner,  Hist.  Prot.  Thtol 1. 19,  E.  T. : 
“  To  this  intellectual  tendency  towards  objective  truth,  and  the  delusion 
it  nourished  concerning  the  magical  power  of  pure  doctrine  as  a  means 
for  the  protection  and  blessing  of  the  whole  man,  there  was  united  a 
moral  security  and  religious  torpidity  which  were  maintained  by  the 
kindred  delusion  that  the  knowledge  of  the  truth — even  its  mere  recep¬ 
tion  as  a  matter  of  memory — brings  with  it  the  Christian  salvation — that 
sin  is  essentially  only  a  want  of  knowledge,  or  error.  Christ  is  thus 
reduced  to  a  mere  revealer  of  the  true  doctrine  concerning  God  and  con¬ 
cerning  the  past  and  future .” 

4  1  Tim.  ii.  5. 

•  Jude  3  :  Tfj  anat;  napaSoOftoy  rots  dyiois  niarei. 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


57 


cost  more  to  redeem  their  souls  :  so  that  he  must 
let  that  alone  for  ever.” 1  As  we  have  seen,  there 
can  be  no  improvements  upon  the  subject-matter  of 
Christianity,  no  additions  to  it,  no  derogations  from 
it.  Christianity,  whether  true  or  false,  speaks  for 
itself :  it  lays  its  own  claim  to  he  received  as  the 
final  announcement  on  the  part  of  Gfod  to  His  calculated 
creatures.  But  in  regard  to  those  “  who  are  with-  objectors, 
out,”  we  may  still  seek  to  prove  that  the  elements 
in  which  the  vital  forces  of  all  religions  consist, 
are  to  he  found  unimpaired  and  vigorous  in  the 
constitution  of  the  faith  of  Christ. 

§2.  For  in  some  quarters  undoubtedly  an  im-  ^ Pr®sv_a‘ 
pression  prevails,  or  at  the  least  is  very  indus-  s^P^on 
triously  circulated,  that  Christianity  has  been  tried  failure^ 
and  has  failed.  We  live  in  times  when  all  insti-  tianity. 
tutions,  political,  social,  religious,  the  cherished 
heritage  of  many  generations,  are  seen  to  he  on 
their  trial.  Nor  is  the  religion  of  Christ,  the 
sacred  deposit  of  the  whole  history  of  the  Church, 
in  its  turn  exempt.  Sometimes  its  failure  is  spoken 
of  as  evident  in  practice,  sometimes  on  speculative 
grounds.  The  world,  it  is  hinted,  sits  loose  to 
faith  in  Christianity,  and  is  beginning  to  disregard 

1  Ps.  xlix.  7,  8,  with  the  comment  of  Delitzscli.  On  the  perpetuity 
of  the  Church,  as  a  doctrinal  tenet,  see  Field,  Of  the  Church,  I.  c.  x., 

Palmer,  Treatise  on  the  Church  of  Christ ,  I.  i.  §  2.  It  was  received 
alike  by  the  Romish  and  Protestant  divines,  and  is  maintained  equally 
by  the  Confession  of  Augsburg,  the  Helvetic  Confession,  and  the  Insti¬ 
tutes  of  Calvin. 


58 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II, 


Of  its  tem 

porary 

character. 


it.  “  Only  a  fourth  part  of  mankind,”  it  is  said, 
with  whatever  truth,  “are  born  Christians.  The 
remainder  never  hear  the  name  of  Christ  except  as 
a  reproach  .  .  .  These  are  facts  which  no  casuistry 
can  explain  away.”1  Again,  “  Christianity,  accord¬ 
ing  to  a  well-known  saying,  has  been  tried  and  failed. 
The  religion  of  Christ  remains  to  he  tried  .  .  .  To¬ 
day  that  failure  is  too  patent.”2  Proudhon  hardily 
proclaimed  that  Christianity  will  certainly  die  out 
in  about  three  hundred  years.3  M.  Comte,  it  is 
well  known,  argues  speculatively  that  all  Theology, 
as  well  as  Metaphysic,  is  unreal;  for  they  deal 
with  the  origin  and  the  end  of  things;  and  of 
these,  he  thinks,  we  can  know  nothing.  They 
serve,  indeed,  a  preparatory  function  in  affording 
a  temporary  stimulus,  an  artificial  basis  to  in¬ 
tellectual  effort.  But  it  is  only  by  laying  them 
aside,  and  ignoring  them,  that  knowledge  has 
made  real  progress.  Thus  Catholicism,  i.  e.  Chris¬ 
tianity,  the  highest,  yet  the  last  type  of  Mono- 

1  Froude  on  Calvinism ,  p.  4.  He  adds,  “  The  Chinese  and  Japanese, 
we  may  almost  say  every  weaker  race  with  whom  we  have  come  in 
contact,  connect  it  only  with  the  forced  intrusion  of  strangers  whose 
behaviour  among  them  has  served  ill  to  recommend  their  creed.” 
Again,  Short  Studies ,  Ser.  IT.  p.  98,  “We  wmnder  at  the  failure  of 
Christianity;  at  the  small  progress  which  it  has  made  in  comparison 
with  the  brilliancy  of  its  rise,”  &c.  This  part  of  the  subject  will  be 
considered  in  Lecture  VIII.  On  the  numerical  division  of  the  human 
race  according  to  religions,  see  Prof.  Max  Muller,  Chips,  I.  216.  Chris¬ 
tianity  should  probably  rank  highest  in  the  scale. 

2  Morley’s  Critical  Miscellanies,  pp.  190,  191. 

3  See  llogers’  Essays,  II.  342. 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


59 


theism,  has  now  done  its  work.  It  has  prepared 
the  way  for  Positivism,  that  is,  for  the  belief  in 
Laws  ;  and  soon  the  present  stage  of  mental  and 
moral  anarchy  must  draw  to  a  close.1  It  cannot,  This  view 

due  to  the 

I  fear,  be  denied  that  there  are  many  solvents  circum- 

stances  of* 

of  customary  belief  at  work  among  us.  The  ad-  the  age, 
vance  through  improved  means  of  locomotion  and 
mechanical  appliances  of  our  knowledge  of  man¬ 
kind,  of  nature,  and  the  earth  which  we  inhabit ; 
the  tendencies  of  physical  inventions,  of  political 
and  social  concentration,  of  scientific  discovery, 
and  of  philosophical  criticism,  are  all  acting  in  one 
direction.  They  will  strip  off,  no  doubt,  the  un¬ 
essential  garb  of  Christianity.  It  remains  to  be 
seen  whether  its  inward  frame  can  be  shaken.  I 
make  no  excuse  for  putting  the  matter  thus  bluntly 
before  you.  It  is  well  even  for  the  youngest  of 
my  hearers,  who  are,  thank  God,  least,  if  at  all, 
familiar  with  the  philosophy  of  unbelief,  to  know 
something  of  its  language  and  mode  of  assault. 

Let  them  not  be  startled.  When  has  the  religion 

1  See  Phil.  Pos.,  III.  418,  V.  299.  He  holds  l’etat  theologique  to  be 
I’etat  fictif.  The  Church  is  with  Comte  a  speculative  corporate  body, 
destined  to  give  way  when  the  interests  of  speculation  and  practice 
are  combined  in  the  advance  of  knowledge.  “  La  theologie  et  la 
physique  sont  profondement  incompatibles.” — Lee.  I.  No  doubt,  it  is 
the  function  of  Religion  and  of  Philosophy  to  offer  a  general  theory  of 
the  universe.  This  theory  is  slowly  verified  or  improved  on  by  the 
progress  of  knowledge  contained  in  particular  sciences.  In  this  manner 
religion  is  always  on  its  trial ;  but  it  has  not  failed  yet,  nor  is  there  any 
reason  to  believe  it  will.  For  an  eloquent  description  of  the  joint  aims 
of  Philosophy  and  Religion,  see  Saisset,  Essais,  pp.  xxxiv.-vii. 


6o 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


but  must 
be  without 
delay  en¬ 
countered. 


Nature  of 
the  current 
attacks  on 
the  success 
of  Chris¬ 
tianity. 


of  Jesus  Christ  not  been  upon  its  trial ;  or  when 
has  it  shrunk  back  from  the  test  ?  But  the  charge 
of  failure  whether  meant  as  a  gibe,1  or  as  a  serious 
objection,  as  a  ready  weapon  of  attack,  or  as  an 
honest  stumbling-block,  cannot  be  overlooked  ;  it 
must  not  be  postponed.  To  ignore  a  doubt,  is  not 
only  open  to  the  imputation  of  cowardice :  it  is 
unwise.  For  it  cannot  but  operate  to  the  prejudice 
of  the  truth  :  and  when  at  last  it  comes  up,  as 
come  it  will,  for  answer,  the  fault  bears  its  own 
punishment. 

§  3.  It  cannot  indeed  be  denied  that  the  im¬ 
putations  to  which  I  have  alluded,  are  current 
in  the  literature  of  the  day.  u  The  popular  re¬ 
ligion,”  it  is  said,  “  has  entered  on  its  last  phase ;  ”2 
“  Christianity  has  dwindled  down  to  a  drivelling, 
feeble,  desultory  thing.”  “  It  is  now  obvious  that 
the  theology  of  former  ages  cannot  be  maintained. 
...  A  change  in  religious  thought  has  gradually 
forced  its  way  through  the  cultivated  classes  of  the 
community.  The  educated  man  no  longer  believes 
what  the  Evangelist  believed  and  affirmed.”  3  “  The 

1  Bishop  Fraser  is  reported  to  have  said  :  “  It  is  a  common  gibe  that 
Christianity  is  losing  power ;  and  to  a  certain  extent,  I  think,  we  cannot 
deny  that  the  gibe  is  true  and  deserved.” — Guardian ,  August  16, 
1871. 

2  No  new  view.  See  ap.  H.  J.  Bose,  Protestantism  in  Germany , 
p.  163,  2nd  ed.  Schmidt  and  other  Rationalists  held  that  Christianity 
is  a  mere  temporary  dispensation,  and  that  the  world  should  return  to 
Natural  Religion. 

3  Christian  Theology  and  Modern  Scepticism,  by  the  Duke  of 
Somerset,  passim.  Fabri  ( Brie/e  gegen  Materialismus )  complains  that 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


6 1 


theological  spirit  is  too  much  decayed  and  too  far 
neutralized  to  be  any  longer  really  formidable  in  any 
part  of  Western  Europe.” 1  Such  are  some  of  the 
statements  not  unfrequently  made.  It  is  of  moment, 
therefore,  to  estimate  the  grounds  on  which  they 
rest,  and  the  amount  of  truth  they  may  contain. 
Nothing  is  easier  than  to  repeat  a  charge  when 
once  it  is  made.  Repeated,  it  soon  begins  to  he  Reasons  of 
believed,  and  held  more  largely  on  a  tacit  principle  portance, 
of  authority ;  and  then  a  fresh  start  is  made  from 
the  assertion  as  if  it  were  a  fact  both  proved  and 
acknowledged.2  On  what  grounds,  then,  we  ask,  is 
the  career  of  Christianity  believed  to  have  closed  ? 

Is  there  any  present  pressing  proof  of  it  ?  Is  it  truer 
now  than  at  any  former  time  ?  Is  it  plainer  now 

the  majority  of  Christians  now-a-days  are  pagans  as  to  head  j  though 

accepting  the  faith  with  their  hearts. 

1  “  L’esprit  theologique  est  trop  dechu  ou  trop  neutralise  pour  etre 
encore  vraiment  dangereux  dans  aucune  parti  e  de  notre  Occident  Eiuo- 
peen.  C’est  partout  l’esprit  metaphysique  qui  constitue  desormais  le 
seul  antagoniste  que  le  Positivisme  doive  avoir  serieusement  en  vue . 
lui  seul  prolonge  desormais  l’influence;  impuissante  pour  rien  fonder, 
mais  trop  efficace  pour  entraver  du  genie  religieux  qui  s  eteindrait 
spontanement  sans  un  tel  remaniement.”  Comte  to  J.  S.  Mill,  ap. 

Littr6,  A.  Comte  et  le  Posit.,  p.  448,  written  1843.  See  also  Paroles 

de  Phil.  Pos.,  p.  24. 

2  “  Ideas  obtain  authority  and  dominion,  not  altogether  from  their 
intrinsic  truth,  hut  rather  from  their  constant  asseveration,  especially 
when  they  fall  in  with  the  common  hopes  and  fears,  the  wants  and 
necessities,  of  human  nature.  The  mass  of  mankind  have  neither 
leisure  nor  ability  to  examine  them :  they  tatigue,  and  so  compel  the 
world  into  acceptance.” — Milman,  Latin  Christianity ,  III.  4. >7.  ,  Les 
fausses  opinions  ressemblent  a  la  fausse  monnaie,  qui  est  frappee  daboul 
par  de  grands  coupables  et  depensee  ensuite  par  d’honnetes  gens  qui  per- 
p4tuent  le  crime  sans  savoir  ce  qu’ils  font.” — De  Maistre,  Soirees,  p.  2G. 


62 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


than  it  has  ever  been  before  ?  Are  there  no  special 
reasons  to  indicate  that  the  wish  may  be  father 
to  the  thought  ?  Is  Christianity  less  an  object  of 
dislike  and  suspicion  than  it  has  ever  been  with 
some  prevalent  systems  of  philosophy  ?  Is  it  less 

their°being of  an  °^stacle  to  ^eir  reception  ?  Is  there  any 
broPughtnt  leSS  imPatience  in  the  heart  and  mind  of  man  than 
forward,  of  old  to  anticipate  the  designs  of  Providence  or 

to  foredate  the  beginning  of  the  end  ?  Something 
may  not  unreasonably  be  attributed  to  the  expecta¬ 
tion  on  the  part  of  its  detractors  that  Christianity 
may  be  killed  or  scotched  by  a  policy  of  indiffer¬ 
ence.  To  pass  it  by  as  already  foredoomed,  to 
deal  with  it  as  a  thing  of  the  past,  much  may 
perhaps  be  looked  for  from  this  course  of  treatment. 
Dogmas  ere  now  have  perished  of  pretermission, 
if  not  of  controversy,  have  given  way  to  a  modi¬ 
fication  of  opinion,  if  not  to  argument,  have 
yielded  to  insensible  decay.  Such  has  been  the 
fate  of  many  an  extinct  superstition.  This  in  the 
eyes  of  some  critics  is  “  the  great  turning-point  in 
the  history  of  civilized  nations.”1  Why,  then, 
should  it  be  otherwise  with  the  time-worn,  cum- 

i  •  •  «  - 1  . 

“  When  in  the  progress  of  society  its  theological  element  begins  to 
decay,  the  ardour  with  which  religious  disputes  were  once  conducted 
becomes  sensibly  weakened.  The  most  advanced  intellects  are  the 
first  to  feel  the  growing  indifference,  and  therefore  they  are  also  the  first 
to  scrutinize  real  events  with  that  inquisitive  eye  which  their  prede¬ 
cessors  had  reserved  for  religious  speculations.  This  is  a  great  turning- 
point  in  the  history  of  every  civilized  nation.”— Buckle,  Hist.  Civil., 
II.  2G3.  Compare  Mr.  Lccky,  IHst.  Hat.,  I.  104. 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


63 


brous  fabric  of  Christian  tradition  ?  The  increas¬ 
ing  secularization  of  politics,  the  loss  of  temporal 
influence  by  the  Church,1  mark,  it  is  urged,  the 
decline  of  dogmatic  theology  as  a  practical  power. 
Moreover,  something  of  a  just  retribution  clings 
about  such  a  change  of  fortune,  which  must  render 
it  not  wholly  displeasing  to  the  taste  of  the  physical 
philosopher.  In  past  days  Theology  began  by 
monopolizing  science,  metaphysic,  even  history 
itself.  In  the  hands  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Church 
she  early  invaded  the  realm  of  Natural  know¬ 
ledge,2  quickly  subordinating  it  to  Revelation,  and 
thereby  rendering  its  progress  impossible.  In  this 
manner  Lactantius  denied  the  sphericity  of  the 
earth,  and  Augustine  antipodes.  “  From  the  fifth 
to  the  twelfth  centuries,”  writes  Guizot,  “it  is 
Theology  that  possessed  and  directed  the  human 
spirit.  All  opinions  are  impressed  by  Theology  : 
philosophical,  political,  and  historical  questions  are 
all  considered  under  a  theological  point  of  view. 
So  all-powerful  is  the  Church  in  the  intellectual 
order  that  even  the  mathematical  and  physical 
sciences  are  held  in  submission  to  its  doctrines. 
The  theological  spirit  is  in  a  manner  the  blood 
which  ran  in  the  veins  of  the  European  world 


Grounds 
for  prepos¬ 
sessions  on 
the  part  of 
Natural 
philoso¬ 
phers. 


Former  re¬ 
lations  of 
Theology 
to  physical 
science. 


1  This  view,  of  course,  loses  sight  of  the  possibility  that  such  a  sever¬ 
ance  may  even  advance  the  ultimate  influence  of  religion.  Otherwise 
Dissent  must  equally  decline  with  Established  religions. 

2  Compare  Bacon,  Nov.  Org.,  Aph.  lxxxix. 


64 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


down  to  Bacon  and  Descartes.” 1  Everywhere  and 
on  all  subjects  the  maxim  was  in  force, 4  Philosophia 
ancillans  theologiae.’  Few  cared  to  perceive  that 
the  true  sphere  of  science  lies  altogether  outside  of 
theological  study.  The  Christian  is  but  implicitly 
and  in  a  secondary  degree  called  on  to  inquire  into 
the  nature  and  constitution  of  things  and  of  Gfod. 
On  this  side  the  true  defence  of  his  system  of 
belief  is  to  isolate  its  claims,  repelling  attack  and 
implied  or  asserted  contradictions.2  History  is  the 
proper  mode  of  exhibiting  the  general  character  of 
the  faith  of  Christ,  as  it  is  of  orthodoxy  in  detail ; 
showing  the  particular  dogma  to  be  either  a  just 
or  false  outcome  of  Scriptural  Revelation.  Now, 
however,  the  tables  are  turned  :  and  the  human 
intellect, 44  waxing,”  it  is  said,  44  in  strength,  learns 
to  rely  upon  its  own  resources,  and  to  throw  off 
incumbrances  by  which  the  freedom  of  its  move¬ 
ments  has  been  long  impaired.”3  So  also  the 

1  Civilization  in  Europe,  E.  Tr.,  I.  114,  ed.  Bohn.  See  also 
Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  V.  478.  Kepler’s  bold  and  plain  words  (Introd.  ad 
Stell.  Martis)  are  well  known.  “  In  Theology  we  balance  authorities, 
in  Philosophy  we  weigh  reasons.  A  holy  man  was  Lactantius,  who 
denied  that  the  earth  was  round :  a  holy  man  was  Augustine  who 
granting  the  rotundity,  denied  the  antipodes :  a  holy  thing  to  me  is 
the  Inquisition,  which  allows  the  smallness  of  the  earth,  but  denies  its 
motion.  But  more  holy  to  me  is  Truth,”  &c.  See  ap.  Whewell,  Indi¬ 
cations  of  the  Creator ,  p.  143,  and  at  length,  Hist.  Induct.  Sc.,  IV.  i.  6,  7. 

2  “  Tout  ce  qui  nous  reste  done  apres  avoir  ajoute  foi  aux  mysteres 
sur  les  preuves  de  la  verite  de  la  religion  (qu’on  appelle  motifs  de  credi¬ 
bility)  e’est  de  les  pouvoir  soutenir  contre  les  objections,”  &c. — Leibnitz, 
Theodicee ,  §  5. 

8  Buckle,  Hist.  Civ.,  II.  263. 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


65 


founder  of  Positivism  looks  forward  to  a  Church, 
Catholic,  but  not  Christian,  which  shall  preside 
over  the  regeneration  of  society,  and  “  the  irresis¬ 
tible  emancipation  of  human  reason.” 1 

§  4.  Certainly,  we  have  no  right  to  complain  inversion 
that  false  assumptions  should  have  borne  their  fetion! lc 
natural  fruit  and  have  yielded  to  fair  attack. 
“Men,”  wrote  Jeremy  Taylor,2  “  will  call  all 
opinions  by  the  name  of  religion,  and  superstruc¬ 
tures  by  the  name  of  fundamental  articles,  and 
fancies  by  the  glorious  appellative  of  faith.” 

Those,  then,  who  made  Theology  the  essence  of  the  ' 
faith,  and  next  installed  her  in  the  throne  of  all 
knowledge,  divine  and  human,  natural  and  super¬ 
natural,  poising  on  some  solitary  statement  as  to  a 
fact  of  history  or  science  the  whole  truth  of  Holy 
Scripture  itself :  such  men  were  perforce  sowing  to 
the  wind,  and  were  the  unwitting  pioneers  of  a 
whole  revolution  of  belief.  “  Science,”  wrote  De 
Maistre  (and  his  sentiment  is  far  from  exploded), 

Phil.  Pos V.  490.  It  is  a  melancholy  satire  on  the  tendencies  of 
Comtism  that,  forsaking  the  Materialism  which  is  its  proper  base,  its 
author  should  have  returned,  as  M.  Littre  reluctantly  admits,  to  a 
Theology,  a  Fetichism  (sic),  a  worship  of  Humanity,  “le  Grand  Etre.” 

I  rof.  Huxley  s  strictures  on  this  subject  are  as  just  as  they  are  able. 

2  Works ,  V.  348,  ed.  Eden. 

3  See  Examen  de  Bacon ,  vol.  ii.  46;  Soirees  de  Saint-Petersbourg, 

V.  Entret.  Works ,  I.  198.  See,  however,  also,  p.  172,  where  the  me¬ 
taphor  is  borrowed.  Leibnitz,  Theodicee ,  §  17,  speaks  of  those  who 
held  as  to  philosophy,  “  qu’elle  devoit  etre  traitee  en  servante  et  non  pas 
en  maitresse  par  rapport  k  la  Theologie.  Enfin  que  c’etoit  une  Hagar 
aupres  de  Sara,  qu’il  falloit  chasser  de  la  maison  avec  son  Ismael,  quand 
elle  faisoit  la  mutine.  It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  Metaphysic,  under 

F 


66 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


Science 
now  tends 
to  the 
adoption 
of  a  sen¬ 
suous  phi¬ 
losophy. 


“  must  be  kept  in  its  place ;  for  it  resembles  fire 
which,  when  confined  in  the  grates  prepared  for  it, 
is  the  most  useful  and  powerful  of  men’s  servants  ; 
scattered  about  anyhow,  it  is  the  most  terrible  ot 
scourges.”  For  this  reason  he  argues  that  physi¬ 
cal  science  was  not  given  to  men  until  Christianity 
was  dominant  in  the  earth.  What  wonder  if  we 
now  hear  the  opinion  loudly  proclaimed  that 
physical  knowledge  is  the  proper  supplement  to 
theological  conceptions  ;  that  “  the  gradual  destruc¬ 
tion  of  the  old  theology  is  everywhere  preceded 
by  the  growth  and  diffusion  of  physical  truths.”  1 
§  5.  The  reverse  excess  is  now  more  to  le 
feared.  The  spirit  of  the  age  proves,  indeed,  that 
mankind  is  still  governed  by  its  prejudices  rather 
than  by  reason.  As  the  medieval  temper  was 
theologically  led  to  an  excessive  credulity,  so  the 
sceptical  tendency  of  the  present  day  leads  men  to 
limit  their  vision  to  objects  of  sense.  Now  it  is 
asserted  that  there  is  no  knowledge  but  of  things 
visible  :  no  truth  which  is  not  real :  no  philosophy 
which  is  not  “  positive.”  2 

We  have  but  faith  :  we  cannot  know ; 

For  knowledge  is  of  things  ive  see ; 

sings  the  greatest  of  our  metaphysical  poets,  con- 

the  name  of  OeoXoyi/07,  had  of  old  assumed  the  highest  rank  in  the 
scale  of  sciences.  See  Arist.,  Metajoh.,  Bk.  V. 

1  Buckle,  Hist.  Civ.,  HI.  478. 

2  Positivism,  by  Comte  identified  with  Natural  Philosophy  in  its 
largest  sense  including  Social  Physics ,  through  a  huge  fundamental 
assumption,  has  come  to  be  purely  negative.  The  term  “  positive  ”  was 
by  the  grammarians  opposed  to  “  natural,”  and  hence  transferred  to  the 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


67 


descending  to  the  language  of  his  time.1  Thus  the 
most  popular  Professor  of  the  day  asserts,  “  there  is 
but  one  kind  of  knowledge  and  but  one  method  of 
acquiiing  it.  .  .  .  What  is  the  history  of  every  Excluding 
science  but  the  history  of  the  elimination  of  the  in  the 
notion  of  creative  or  other  interferences  ?  Unseen* 
Hai  monious  order  governing  eternally  continuous 
progress,  the  web  and  woof  of  Matter  and  Force 
interweaving  by  slow  degrees,  without  a  broken 
thread,  that  veil  which  lies  between  us  and  the 
Infinite,  that  univevse  which  alone  we  know  ov  can 
know,  2  Here  is  something  very  different  from 

distinction  between  legal  and  moral  obligations.  “  In  laws,”  says 
Hooker,  “  that  which  is  natural  bindeth  universally ;  that  which  is 
positive  not  so.”  E.  P.,  I.  x.  7.  Thus  also  Bishop  Butler  contrasts  moral 
and  positive  duties.  Analogy, ,  Pt.  II.  c.  i.  Its  present  use  seems 
derived  trom  its  logical  sense,  denoting  “  rem  quasi  prsesentem.”  The 
intermediate  notion,  however,  by  which  laws  of  nature  are  regarded  as 
positive,  is  thus  stated  by  Leibnitz “  II  y  en  a  d’autres  verites  qu’011 
Pent  appeler  positives,  parce  qu’elles  sont  les  lois  qu’il  a  pin  a  Lieu  de 
donner  a  la  Nature,  011  parce  qu’elles  en  dependent.” 

And  truly  enough :  only  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that  faith  is  to 
man  the  very  “  evidence  of  things  not  seen,”  the  fundamental  condition 
ot  all  true  human  knowledge,  intellectual  or  moral.  We  may  justly 
ask  whether  the  materialism  of  the  day,  resting  on  physical  philosophy 
has  any  new  proof  or  necessity  to  offer,  not  open  to  earlier  speculation. 

.  ^  H«xley>  LaV  Sermons,  p.  310.  “Notre  ame,”  says  Pascal,  “  est 
jetee  dans^  le  corps  ou  elle  trouve  nombre,  temps,  dimension.  Elle 
raisonne  la-dessus  et  appelle  cola  Nature,  necessity  et  ne  pent  croire 
autre  chose .”  Yet  he  acknowledges  fully  the  modest  limits  of  human 
apprehension.  “  Les  sciences  ont  deux  extremites  qui  se  touchent:  la 
premiere  est  la  pure  ignorance  naturelle  ou  se  trouvent  tous  les  hommes 
en  naissant :  l’autre  extremite  est  celle  ou  arrivent  les  grandes  ames, 
qui  ay  ant  parcouru  tout  ce  que  les  hommes  peuvent  savoir,  trouvent 
qu  ils  ne  savent  rien,  et  se  rencontrent  en  cette  m§me  ignorance  d’ou  ils 
etaient  partis.  Mais  c’est  une  ignorance  savante  qui  se  connaif.” 

( Pensets ,  II.  163  ;  I.  180.) 

F  2 


68 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


the  doctrine  of  the  relativity  of  human  know¬ 
ledge.  No  alternative  is  presented  between  mate¬ 
rialism1  and  sheer  ignorance;  either  alike  incom¬ 
petent  to  satisfy  the  demand  of  man’s  intelligence 
or  spirit.  So  extremes  meet.  The  ultimate 
analysis  of  science,  the  rudimentary  ignorance  of 
barbarism,  have  kissed  each  other.  Both  refuse  to 
travel  beyond  the  avouchments  of  the  senses.  Mr. 
Bailey,  long  a  resident  among  the  Veddahs  of 
Ceylon,  says : — “  They  have  no  knowledge  of  a 
Supreme  Being.  Ms  He  on  a  rock — on  a  white 
ant-hill — on  a  tree  ?  I  never  saw  a  Grod,’  was  the 
only  reply  I  received  to  repeated  questions.” 2 

1  How  dangerously  near  such  teaching  approaches  to  materialism  may 
be  seen  from  the  language  of  Feuerbach.  “  Personality,  individuality, 
consciousness,  without  Nature  is  nothing  ;  or,  which  is  the  same  thing, 
an  empty,  unsubstantial  abstraction.  But  Nature  is  nothing  without 
corporeality.  .  .  .  Beal  sensational  existence  is  that  which  is  not  dependent 
on  my  own  mental  spontaneity  or  activity,  hut  by  which  I  am  involun¬ 
tarily  affected :  which  is  when  I  cannot,  do  not  think  of  it  or  feel  it. 
The  existence  of  God  must  therefore  he  in  space :  in  general  a  quali¬ 
tative,  sensational  existence.  But  God  is  not  seen,  not  heard,  not  per¬ 
ceived  by  the  senses.  He  does  not  exist  for  me,  if  I  do  not  exist  for 
Him.” — Essence  of  Christianity ,  E.  T.,  pp.  90,  199.  Augustine  thus 
characterizes  the  Positivism  of  his  day  : — “  Sed  res  est  longe  remota  a 
vanorum  hominum  mentibus  qui  nimis  in  hose  corporalia  progressi  atque 
lapsi  nihil  aliud  putant  esse  quam  quod  istis  quinque  notissimis  nuntiis 
corporis  sentiunt :  et  quas  ah  his  plagas  atque  imagines  acceperunt  eas 
secum  volvunt  etiam  cum  conantur  recedere  a  sensibus  et  ex  earum 
mortifera  et  fallacissima  regula  ineffabilia  penetralia  veritatis  rectissimd 
se  metiri  putant.” — Util.  Cred .,  c.  i. 

2  Quoted  by  Mr.  Farrar  on  the  Universality  of  a  Belief  in  God. 
( Anthropological  Review,  August,  1864.)  As  to  the  Veddahs,  however, 
see  Tylor,  Prim.  Cult.,  I.  45 ;  and  on  the  whole  question  of  savage 
races  being  destitute  of  the  elements  of  religion,  id.  I.  c.  xi.,  pp.  377-83. 
Also  Luthardt,  Apolog.,  E.  T.,  p.  42. 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


69 


Thus  religion,  the  science  of  spiritual  things, 
whose  subject-matter,  passing  the  sphere  of  experi¬ 
ence,  is  the  soul  and  spirit  of  man,  and  his  relations 
to  the  Maker  of  the  universe,  “  dwelling  in  the 
light  which  no  man  can  approach  unto ;  Whom  no 
man  hath  seen,  nor  can  see,”1  is  in  this  school  of 
thought  dethroned,  discrowned,  nay,  thrust  out  for 
final  extinction :  her  occupation  gone,  the  reason 
of  her  being  disallowed.2 

§  6.  The  inquiry  remains,  Why  must  we  believe  Assump- 
that  Christianity  has  failed  ?  If  the  charge  be  necessary 

•  to  ct  l^diof" 

true,  it  must  he  capable  of  proof,  either  from  the  in  the 
exhibition  of  a  fixed  tendency  to  decline — the  re-  chHs-  °f 
ligion  of  Christ  must  be  shown  to  have  already  tlamty’ 
passed  its  meridian,  and  to  have  yielded  only  dis¬ 
appointing  results — or  from  a  present  feebleness 
and  prostration,  so  utter  and  unquestionable,  so 
chronic  and  inherent,  as  to  defy  dispute ;  or,  lastly, 
from  the  discovery  that  the  tenets  of  Christianity 


1  1  Tim.  vi.  16.  Comp.  Tertullian,  Apoi.,  c.  xviii.  Invisibilis  est  etsi 
videatur  :  incomprehensibilis,  etsi  per  gratiam  repnesentetur ;  insesti- 
mabilis,  etsi  humanis  sensibus  sestimetur.  It  is  in  this  sense  that 
Augustine  writes:  “Summus  ille  Deus  qui  scitur  melius  nesciendo.” 
I)e  Ord.,  II.  xvi. 

2  Lange,  Geschichte  des  Material  ismus,  p.  60,  has  some  good  re¬ 
marks  on  the  insensible  stages  by  which  the  physical  philosophy  of  the 
day  passes  into  dogmatism.  “  Unsere  Materialisten  vergessen  nur  zu 
haufig,  dass  sie  ganz  einerlei,  ob  sie  von  Beruf  etwa  Professoren  der 
Physiologie  sind  oder  nicht, — sich  alsbald  auf  dem  Boden  der  Philo- 
sophie  und  nicht  der  Natur  Wissenschaft  befinden,  wenn  sie  sich  zu 
einer  Gresammtanschauung  des  AVeltganzen  zu  erheben  versuchen, 
und  dass  sic  dogmatische  Philosophen  sind,  wenn  sie  die  Besultate  ihrer 
Anschauungen  kategoriscli  als  Thatsachen  vortragen.” 


70 


[Lect.  II. 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 

£ii  e  incompatible  with,  truths  now  very  generally 
acknowledged,  and  with  that  marked  progress  in 
intellectual  effort  which  is  a  main  ingredient  in 
the  present  condition  of  affairs.  It  is  with  the 
last  of  these  alternatives  that  we  shall  first,  and 
tut?ng"a  ^01  some  be  occupied  ;  for  the  particular  ob- 
ilfpower  Jections  which  it  covers  are  fatal  not  only  to  the 
witCh°aedX-ist  continuance  of  Christianity,  but  to  all  systems 
dvS  of  reli&ion  acknowledging  or  implying  Theism.1 
tion.  These,  then,  require  to  be  met  before  entering  on 
the  dnect  historical  proofs  which  guarantee  the 
prospects  of  our  common  faith.  With  one  of  these, 
indeed,  the  lefutation  of  such  objections  is  imme¬ 
diately  connected,  and  practically  identical.  For 
the  power,  which  they  impugn,  of  assimilating 
healthfully  the  varying  conditions,  the  attendant 
conceptions  of  progressive  civilization,  must  ever 
be  a  most  important  ingredient  in  a  religion  des¬ 
tined  for  permanence.  It  is  this  element  which 
is  mainly  neutralized  or  denied  in  the  observations 
which  will  now  be  considered. 

objections  §  Tlie  difficulties  still  urged  against  the  re- 

1  It  is  evident  that,  though  a  man  may  be  a  Theist  and  not  a 
Christian,  a  fact  which  has  recently  been  somewhat  ostentatiously  pro¬ 
claimed  (  Christianity  and  Modern  Scepticism ,  sub  fin.),  it  is  impossible 
for  him  to  be  a  Christian  and  not  a  Theist.  Thus,  Shaftesbury 
w°rhs,  II.  209,  writes :  “  Averse  as  I  am  to  the  cause  of  Theism,  or 
name  of  Deist,  when  taken  in  a  sense  exclusive  of  Revelation,  I 
consider  still  that  in  strictness  the  root  of  all  is  Theism ;  and  that 

to  be  a  settled  Christian,  it  is  necessary  to  be  first  of  all  a  <mod 
Theist.”  & 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


7 1 


eeption  of  Christianity  are  partly  very  ancient,  on  which 

,  i  i  ,  ,  J  1  this  as- 

t nought  now  advanced  upon  new  grounds  :  some  sumption 
are  essentially  modern  in  their  character  and  bear- 15  °U1K  e<  ’ 
-ings,  and,  as  such,  are  at  present  most  frequently 
encountered.  Though  general  in  their  scope,  they 
are  brought  to  bear  particularly  on  the  dominant, 
that  is,  upon  the  Christian  faith.  All  progress,  it 
is  asserted,  in  human  affairs,  of  whatever  kind,  is 
intellectual.  Moral  subjects  form  no  exception.1 
The  progress  of  Nature  is  towards  intellectual,  not 
moral  development.  Moral  dogmas,  if  they  advance 
at  all,  which  is  very  questionable,  advance  only 
through  intellectual  processes.  The  same  is  true 
no  less  of  theological  and  religious  beliefs,  which 
owe  their  virtue  to  their  moral  element.  Religion 
has  never  been  a  true  source  of  culture,  which  is 
really  derived  from  knowledge  and  not  from  belief.2 


1  Pascal  long  ago  noted  the  source  of  this  confusion.  “  Les  inventions 
des  hommes  vont  en  avanfant  de  siecle  en  sikcle.  La  bonte  et  la 
malice  du  monde  en  general  en  est  de  meme.” — Pensees,  I.  205.  The 
notions  of  Mr.  Buckle  and  kindred  thinkers  on  these  subjects  are  trace¬ 
able  to  Condorcet  and  Turgot.  “  Progress,”  says  Mr.  Morley,  Crit. 
Misc .,  p.  91,  “  in  Condorcet’s  mind  is  exclusively  produced  by  improve¬ 
ment  in  intelligence.  It  is  the  necessary  result  of  man’s  activity  in  the 
face  of  that  disproportion  ever  existing  between  what  he  knows  and 
what  he  desires  and  feels  the  necessity  to  know.  Hence  the  most  fatal 
errors  of  his  sketch.  He  measures  only  the  contributions  made  by  nations 
and  eras  to  what  we  know ;  leaving  out  of  sight  their  failures  and  suc¬ 
cesses  in  the  elevation  of  moral  standards  and  ideals,  and  in  the  purifi¬ 
cation  of  the  passions.” 

2  See  Buckle,  Fist.  Civ.,  I.  254.  “  When  religious  opinions  are 

deeply  rooted,  they  do,  no  doubt,  influence  the  conduct  of  men ;  but 
before  they  can  be  deeply  rooted,  some  intellectual  change  must  first 
have  taken  place,”  &c. 


current 
in  the 
literature 
of  the  day, 


7 2  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  II. 

Civilization  explains  religion,  and  not  religion  civi¬ 
lization.  “  The  history  of  the  civilization  of  the 
earth,”  it  has  been  quaintly  said,  “  is  the  history 
of  the  civilization  of  Olympus  also.”1  Thus  Chris¬ 
tianity  has  been  no  cause  of  civilization,  but  its 
effect.  The  consequences  very  commonly  attri¬ 
buted  to  Christianity  in  the  history  of  mankind 
are  really  due  to  an  advance  in  civilization.  The 
Church  of  Christ  may  seem  to  have  done  some 
good  in  things  where  her  interest  did  not  happen 
to  clash  with  the  interests  of  Eurojie,  as  in  helping 
to  abolish  slavery;  but,  after  all,  circumstances 
and  manners  would  have  produced  the  result  ne¬ 
cessarily  and  of  themselves.2  The  essence  of  all 
religions  is  in  a  moral  code,  and  this  is  found  to 
be  nearly  everywhere  identical.  So  in  the  moral 
part  of  Christianity  there  is  nothing  new.  All 
piovidential  interposition,  speculatively  or  histori¬ 
cally  considered,  is  inadmissible,  and  therefore, 
also,  every  religion  resting  upon  such  interpo¬ 
sition.  Such  notions  belong  altogether  to  the 

1  Morley,  Grit.  Misc.,  p.  153. 

2  See  Condorcet  ap.  Morley,  Grit.  Misc .,  p.  94,  and  M.  Comte,  Phil. 
Pos.,  V.  397.  The  case  is  temperately  and  honestly  stated  by  Guizot, 
Giv.  in  id,  I.  110,  ed.  Bohn.  “  It  has  often  been  repeated  that  the 
abolition  of  slavery  among  modern  people  is  due  entirely  to  Christians. 
T  hat,  I  think,  is  saying  too  much :  slavery  existed  for  a  long  period  in 
the  heart  of  Christian  society,  without  its  being  particularly  astonished 
or  irritated.  A  multitude  of  causes  and  a  great  development  in  other 
ideas  and  principles  of  civilization  were  necessary  for  the  abolition  of 
this  iniquity  of  all  iniquities.  It  cannot  be  doubted,  however,  that  the 
Church  exerted  its  influence  to  restrain  it.” 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


73 


infancy  of  knowledge ;  its  progress  is  marked  by 
their  decay  and  extinction.  Since  the  discovery 
of  the  great  laws  and  agencies  of  Nature  all 
miraculous  tales  have  been  given  up.  Every 
advance  of  science  is  an  extension  of  the  idea 
of  Law,  and  that  into  regions  of  thought  and 
phenomena  hitherto  held  exempt.1  But  the  theory 
of  universal  invariable  law  is  abhorrent  from 
Christian  doctrine,  and,  indeed,  from  all  systems 
which  are  not  of  a  pantheistic  character,  or,  at 
least,  go  beyond  pure  theism.  Religion  itself,  and 
so-called  revelation,  are  parts  of  the  order  of 
Nature,  and  may  be  explained  out  of  phenomena 
which  leave  no  room  for  supernatural  considera¬ 
tions.  Religion  is  a  natural  infirmity  of  the  fotal  to 
human  mind  in  its  immature  stages,  just  as  there  nencPe  and 
are  specific  disorders  in  childhood  incident  to  the  Christian- 
llUman  body.  Thus  Christianity  is  a  partial  and  of  an 
evanescent  form  of  anthropomorphism,  necessary  religion, 
perhaps  to  a  transitional  mode  of  thought.  It  is 
the  tendency  of  knowledge,  and  so  of  civilization, 
to  extinguish  religion.  Advancing  culture  removes 
the  feelings,  or  more  strictly  the  occasions  of  the  feel¬ 
ings,  which  are  the  elements  of  religious  sentiment. 

By  eliminating  fear  and  wonder  from  the  mind, 
in  its  gradually  increased  acquaintance  with  the 


1  Such  as  the  special  Providence  of  God,  the  foundation  of  all  reli¬ 
gion  :  the  freedom  and  personality  of  man :  with  its  consequences  on 
social  law  and  morality.  Sec  some  good  remarks  in  Christian  Remem¬ 
brancer ,  No.  CXXXI.,  p.  240. 


74 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


They  are 
for  this 
reason 
answered 
in  detail. 


facts  of  the  external  world,  the  ingredients  of 
veneration  are  dissolved,  and  religion  itself  dis¬ 
appears  in  the  analysis.  And,  lastly,  the  sense 
of  free  agency  is  more  than  suspected  to  be  only  a 
trick  of  consciousness,  a  product  of  organic  evo¬ 
lution,  and  to  be  incompatible  alike  with  just 
theories  of  a  natural  causation,  and  with  statistical 
results.  But  if  moral  responsibility  be  removed, 
most,  it  must  be  admitted,  of  the  groundwork  of 
religious  truth,  under  whatever  system,  will  fall 
away  with  it.  Prayer,  for  example,  can  no  longer 
be  regarded  as  “  man’s  rational  prerogative,”  but 
rather  as  “  a  transient  bewilderment  of  the  social 
instinct,”  the  “  misapplication  of  a  social  habit,” 
or  “the  delusive  self-confidence  of  human  feeling.”1 

I  proceed  to  enter  more  or  less  fully  on  the 
topics  indicated.  All  are  more  or  less  directly 
connected  with  the  permanence  of  the  faith  of 
Christ.  The  world  at  large  is  always  ready  to 
mistake  difficulties  which  really  underlie  all  human 
thought  for  difficulties  in  the  way  of  Christian 


1  See  Coleridge’s  remarks  on  this  subject  in  Aids  to  Reflection ,  p.  55, 
and  on  the  other  side  Comte,  Phil.  Pos .,  IV.  pp.  671-3.  I  cannot  refrain 
from  quoting  a  noble  passage  from  Mr.  Hutton,  Essays,  I.  368  :  — 
Prayer  is  and  can  only  be  possible  on  the  assumption  that  it  is  a  real 
influence  with  God :  that,  whether  granted  or  denied,  it  is  efficient  as 
an  expression  of  our  spiritual  want  and  resolution :  that  the  breath  of 
power  which  answers  it  is  a  living  response,  and  like  all  living  responses 
the  fiee  utteiance  of  the  moment,  not  the  pre-ordained  consequent 
waiting  for  a  pre-ordained  antecedent :  that  there  is  a  sphere  beyond  all 
necessaiy  law,  in  which  both  the  Divine  and  human  life  are  not  con¬ 
strained  by  immutable  arrangements,  but  free.” 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


75 


belief.  So  far  forth,  however,  as  they  affect  the 
permanence  of  Christianity,  being  themselves  in¬ 
volved  in  the  current  philosophy  of  the  age,  and 
representing  the  spirit  of  its  thought,  they  will 
be  properly  considered  here.  For  certainly  of 
most  of  them  it  may  be  said  that,  if  these  views 
must  be  accepted,  the  days  of  the  reception  of 
the  faith  of  Christ  by  mankind,  or  at  least  by 
its  most  civilized  portion,  are  undoubtedly  num¬ 
bered,  and  perhaps  quickly  told.  Whatever  may 
have  been  the  benefits  it  has  conferred  upon  past 
generations,  whatever  its  connections  with  fore¬ 
gone  civilization,  its  part,  if  these  things  be  so, 
has  been  indeed  jolayed  out,  its  work  is  done, 
its  glory  departed,  and  “  the  ark  of  our  God  is 
taken.” 

§  8.  The  limits  assigned  me  in  these  Lectures  ciassifica- 
will  be  best  observed  by  grouping  the  objections  such  ob- 
specified  under  three  general  heads.  They  will  be  )ecl'ons' 
found  to  involve  the  relations  either  (I.),  of  causa¬ 
tion  to  free  agency ;  or  (II.),  of  universal  law  to 
providential  agency;  or  (III.),  of  intellectual  to 
moral  and  religious  action.  “  Every  religion,”  says 
a  distinguished  living  philosopher,1  “  may  be  de¬ 
fined  as  an  a  priori  theory  of  the  universe.” 
“Every  perfect  religion,”  writes  another  careful 
and  precise  thinker,2  “  must  give  account  of  three 

1  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer,  First  Principles,  p.  43. 

2  Dr.  Westcott,  Comte  on  Christianity,  Cant.  Pcv.  VIII.  373. 


76 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


Those 
relating 
to  the 
existence 
of  free 
agency 
in  man 
first  con¬ 
sidered. 


The  pre¬ 
sent  aspect 
of  science 
material¬ 
istic, 


elements — the  individual,  the  world,  and  God.’" 
Our  immediate  task  is  to  examine  whether  the 
principles  on  these  subjects,  necessary  to  the  exist¬ 
ence  of  Christianity,  are  irreconcilable  with  the 
conclusions  of  existing  science.1  No  fact  is  more 
suggestive  of  the  intellectual  temper  of  our  time 
than  the  manner  in  which  the  question  of  man’s 
liberty  of  action  is  now  discussed,  and  the  grounds 
on  which  it  is  not  uncommonly  set  aside.  Rele¬ 
gated  on  its  metaphysical  side2  to  the  limbo  of  un¬ 
fruitful  disputations,  it  is  approached  and  decided 
by  physical  considerations,  as  a  material  rather 
than  a  mental  fact,  or  as  a  mental  fact  capable 
of  material  explanation.  Minds  occupied  only  or 
mainly  with  physical  inquiries  readily  apply  the 
notion  of  material  causation,  the  nexus  between 
antecedent  and  consequent,  with  which  they  are 
familiar,  to  the  phenomena  of  thought  and  action.3 
Uniformity  of  result,  statistically  obtained,  is  taken 
to  prove  identity  of  origin ;  and  moral  operations 

1  “  The  questions  which  belong  to  natural  theology  are  in  substance 
the  same  from  age  to  age ;  but  they  change  their  aspect  with  every 
advance  or  supposed  advance  in  the  inductive  sciences.” — Whewell, 
Indie,  of  the  Creator ,  p.  ix. 

2  Sir  H.  Maine,  Ancient  Law ,  p.  354,  has  pointed  out  that  the 
problem  of  free-will  arises  when  we  contemplate  a  metaphysical  con¬ 
ception  under  a  legal  aspect.  Dean  Merivale  has  traced  the  theological 
history  of  the  controversy  to  the  expressions  of  Roman  law. 

3  Compare  Augustine,  Ver.  Relig.,  c.  xxxvi.  “  Quoniam  opera  magis 
Artificem  atque  ipsam  artem  dilexerunt  hoc  errore  puniuntur  ut  in 
operibus  artificem  artemque  conquirant:  et  cum  invenire  nequiverint 
(Deus  enim  non  corporalibus  sensibus  subjacet  sed  ipsi  menti  super- 
eminet)  ipsa  opera  existiment  esse  et  artem  et  artificem.” 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


77 


are  confounded  with  material  processes.1  Thus  it 
is  asked,  as  an  inquiry  decisive  of  the  matter  in 
hand,  whether  the  actions  of  men,  and  therefore 
of  societies,  are  not  governed  by  fixed  laws ;  or 
whether  they  are  to  be  regarded  as  the  result  of 
chance  or  of  supernatural  interference.2  For  on 
this  issue  depends  the  desideratum  of  the  Positive 
School,  the  possibility  of  an  exact  science  of  man 
and  history.  Now  chance,  it  may  at  once  be  ad¬ 
mitted,  is  but  another  name  for  ignorance  of  causa¬ 
tion.3  We  know  nothing  in  Nature,  or,  if  it  may 
be  so  said,  out  of  Nature,  which  is  not  under  the 

1  This  is,  no  doubt,  the  first  effect  of  the  enthusiasm  and  instinct  of 
symmetry  which  are  the  just  results  of  the  surprising  triumphs  of  phy¬ 
sical  discovery.  Mr.  Lecky  well  remarks,  Hist.  Rat.,  I.  322,  “  In  the 
present  day,  when  the  study  of  the  laws  of  matter  has  assumed  an 
extraordinary  development,  and  when  the  relations  between  mind  and 
body  are  chiefly  investigated  with  a.  primary  view  to  the  functions  of  the 
latter,  it  is  neither  surprising  nor  alarming  that  a  strong  movement 
towards  materialism  should  be  the  consequence.”  Leibnitz  finely  ob¬ 
serves  :  “  11  paroit  d’abord  que  tout  ce  que  nous  faisons  n’est  qu’impul- 
sion  d’autrui :  et  que  tout  ce  que  nous  concevons  vient  de  dehors  par 
les  sens,  et  se  trace  dans  le  vuide  de  notre  esprit,  tanquam  in  tabula 
rasa.  Mais  une  meditation  plus  profonde  nous  apprend  que  tout  (memo 
les  perceptions  fit  les  passions)  nous  vient  de  notre  propre  fonds  avec  une 
pleine  spontaneite.” — Theod.,  Pt.  III.  §  296. 

2  See  Buckle,  Hist  Civil.,  I.  p.  8  ff. 

d  “  hTe  parlons  plus  de  hasard  ni  de  fortune,  ou  parlons-en  seulement 
comme  d’un  nom  dont  nous  couvrons  notre  ignorance.” — Bossuet,  Disc, 
sur  V Hist.  Univ.,  III.  viii.  “  Tous  les  sages,”  says  Leibnitz,  “  con  ■ 
viennent  que  le  hasard  n’est  qu’une  chose  apparente:  c’est  l’ignorance 
des  causes  qui  le  fait.”  Aoieei  y.ev  alr'ia  rj  rvy?),  ddrjXos  de  dvdyanrlvy 
dcavola.  Arist.,  Phys.,  II.  iv.  Mr.  Tylor,  Hist.  Prim.  Cult.,  I.  17, 
furnishes  an  admirable  illustration.  “  The  Great  Spirit,”  say  the  Sioux 
Indians,  “  made  all  things  except  the  wild  rice ;  but  the  wild  rice  came 
by  chance.”  Here  the  ambiguity  is  apparent,  which  opposes  chance  not 
to  causation,  but  to  design. 


78 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


and  tend¬ 
ing  to 
bring 
man’s 
liberty 
of  action 
under  the 
uniformity 
of  laws  of 
Nature. 


direction  of  fixed  principles  and  ascertainable  ele¬ 
mentary  causes.1  But  when,  this  correction  made, 
the  question  is  again  stated,  does  it  present  a  real 
dilemma  ?  The  will  of  man,  it  may  be  reasonably 
contended,  is  itself  a  cause,  subject  to  conditioned 
action,2  governed  therefore  by  fixed  laws  of  choice 
as  well  as  of  subsequent  operation,  yet  in  its  nature 
motive ,  and  analogous,  so  far  considered,  to  any 
simple  elementary  force  or  form  of  force  in  physics. 
There  is  no  greater  antecedent  difficulty  in  con¬ 
ceiving  the  agency  of  the  one  than  of  the  other.3 
But  then  the  action  of  man’s  will,  it  may  be  said,  is 
in  this  view  hypothetically  different  from  that  of 
all  natural  forces.  For  while  the  cause  of  motion 
to  things  external  to  itself,  its  own  movements  are 

1  “  The  nature  of  a  thing  is  the  answer  both  of  the  ignorant  and  of 
the  philosopher.  Search  for  laws.” — Faraday,  Life ,  II.  86.  Law  may 
be  said  to  be  the  first  announcement  of  Holy  Scripture;  when  God 
spake,  “  Let  there  be  light ;  ”  and  there  was  light. 

2  Rom.  viii.  20.  “  For  the  creature  was  made  subject  to  vanity,  not 

willingly,  hut  by  reason  of  him  who  hath  subjected  the  same  in  hope.” 

3  The  embarrassments  attending  the  notion  of  Force  as  a  property  of 
Matter  are  now  understood.  Thus  the  terms  energy ,  behaviour ,  and 
the  like  have  been  transferred  by  modern  physicists  from  moral  pheno¬ 
mena  as  the  best  exponents  of  natural  force.  See  Prof.  Tyndall, 
Fragments  of  Science,  p.  22.  Whewell’s  Indications  of  the  Creator ,  p.  90. 
Lange,  Geschichte  des  Material ismus,  pp.  376-7,  has  some  good  remarks 
on  the  bearing  of  this  fact  upon  a  doctrine  of  materialism.  While  recog¬ 
nizing  to  the  full  the  charm  of  style  and  language  possessed  by  a 
Tyndall  and  a  Huxley,  I  cannot  forbear  to  point  out  the  responsibility 
attaching  to  their  vast  powers  in  this  respect.  This  has  been  ably 
touched  by  a  writer  in  the  ‘  Quarterly  Review,’  No.  CCXX.  p.  370. 
Leibnitz  has  well  said,  “  Souvent  les  expressions  outrees  et  pour  ainsi 
dire  poetiques,  ont  plus  de  force  pour  toucher  et  pour  persuader  que  ce 
qui  se  dit  avec  regularite.” 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


79 


assumed  to  be  ultimately  free,  that  is,  uncaused, 
however  biassed  by  the  conditions  and  circum¬ 
stances  of  acting*.  Now,  the  bowl  will  roll  indeed 
according  to  its  bias,  but  it  must  first  find  else¬ 
where  an  origin  of  movement.  This  supposition, 
then,  it  is  urged,  is  inconsistent  with  the  whole 
analogy  of  Nature,  and  is  unsupported  by  the  evi¬ 
dence  of  facts. 

§  9*  The  question  thus  stated  will  be  perceived  The  theo- 
to  have  no  immediate  connection  with  the  theolo-  tenetof 
gical  tenet  of  free-will.1  By  this  is  properly  to  be  dis¬ 
covered  the  relation  of  man’s  will  to  supernatural  Sd 
or  Divine  interference,  the  measure,  so  to  speak,  of  or  mer¬ 
its  subservience,  the  will  being  assumed,  as  to  itself,  Question, 
to  be  an  instance  of  causation  in  Nature.  At  pre¬ 
sent  we  are  concerned  only  with  the  scientific  fact 
of  the  existence  of  will  in  man,  as  being  a  funda¬ 
mental  condition  of  the  permanence  of  our  religion. 

To  the  mode  of  its  operation  the  old  physical  axiom 
may  with  reason  be  applied — Corpora  non  agunt 
nisi  soluta.  b  or  it  needs  hardly  to  remark  that  to 
speak  of  fiee-will  is  no  better  than  a  tautology,  not 
to  rank  it  among  the  “  question-begging  appella¬ 
tives  ”  of  Bentham,  a  will  not  free  being  a  con¬ 
tradiction  in  terms,  a  conception  which  excludes 
itself.2  There  is,  indeed,  an  aspect  in  which  the 

Mi.  Buckle,  Hist.  Civ.,  I.  pp.  9,  20,  has  indeed  exhibited  this  sub- 
j-t  very  differently ;  yet,  as  it  seems  to  me,  with  some  confusion. 

2  This,  it  is  found,  was  the  view  of  Spinoza  (Ed.  Auerbach).  Cole- 
ridge  justly  remarks:  “A  will,  the  state  of  which  does  in  no  sense 


8o 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


The  theo¬ 
logical 
dogma 
not  neces¬ 
sarily  in¬ 
compatible 
with  the 
view  of 
natural 
science. 


The  argu¬ 
ment  from 


theological  dogma  is  not  unconcerned  with  the 
scientific  question.  Thus,  if  the  assumption  of 
universal  law  as  a  principle  of  science,  or  of  na¬ 
tural  selection  and  gradual  evolution  as  applica¬ 
tions  of  it,  require  in  regard  of  human  action  the 
reception  of  a  system  of  fatalism,  whether  pure  or 
modified,  it  would  not  be  difficult,  by  means  of  a 
doctrine  of  predestination,  determinism,  or  even 
of  eternal  reprobation,  to  institute  an  apparent  alli¬ 
ance  between  some  aspects  of  Christianity  and 
science.1  This  subject  it  is  not  within  our  limits  to 
pursue  further,  though  it  has  been  stirred  by  some 
leading  writers  of  the  time.2  I  would  remark  only 
that  among  defensive  arguments  such  reasoning  is 
at  least  not  inadmissible. 

§  10.  Are,  then,  the  grounds  on  which  the  human 

originate  in  its  own  act,  is  an  absolute  contradiction.  It  might  be  an 
instinct,  an  impulse,  a  plastic  power,  and  if  accompanied  with  conscious¬ 
ness,  a  desire  ;  but  a  will  it  could  not  be.” — A.  Pi.,  p.  104.  Scientific 
and  theological  determinism  may  thus  practically  coincide.  A  will, 
which  is  absorbed  in  the  conditions  of  its  operation,  is  no  will ;  and 
if  the  actions  of  men  “are  merely  the  product  of  a  collision  between 
internal  and  external  phenomena,”  responsibility  of  conduct  is  evaded. 
“  Voluntas,”  said  even  Luther,  “  qu£e  potest  cogi  et  cogitur,  non  est 
voluntas  sed  noluntas.” 

1  Thus  the  Leibnitian  doctrine  of  Monads  and  a  Pre-established  Har¬ 
mony,  when  assailed  as  involving  Fatalism,  was  defended  by  its  author 
as  not  incompatible  with  the  Christian  doctrine  of  Grace. 

2  It  is  suggested  by  Mr.  Buckle  in  his  highly  interesting  comparison 
of  Calvinism  with  Arminianism,  H.  Civ.,  II.  342 ;  and  by  Mr.  Froude 
in  his  most  eloquent,  though  somewhat  vague,  lecture  on  Calvinism. 
See  also  Mr.  J.  S.  Mill,  Exam,  of  Sir  W.  Hamilton,  p.  492.  Sir 
William  (Appendix  to  Peid,  p.  977)  is  careful  to  point  out  that  the 
Calvinist  theologian  holds  to  the  liberty  of  man  by  the  side  of  a  doc¬ 
trine  of  predestination  and  foreknowledge  of  God. 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


81 


i*ace  lias  ever  attributed  to  itself  the  possession  of  natural 

•  II  r  1  ±<  instincts 

will,  ot  an  independent  power  of  acting,  and  an  in  favour 
ultimate  freedom  of  choice,  are  these  indeed  real,  will, 
or  to  be  accounted  imaginary  ?  Is  there  anything 
m  the  present  state  of  our  knowledge  which  renders 
such  a  belief  incredible  through  a  diverse,  yet 
adequate,  explanation  of  admitted  facts  ?  Are  the 
sentiments  and  volitions  which  have  hitherto  been 
presumed  to  be  the  properties  of  our  personal 
activity,  to  be  henceforward  referred  to  general 
laws  ?  Do  our  u  thoughts,  wills,  and  actions 
accord  with  laws  as  definite  as  those  which  govern 
the  motion  of  waves,  the  combination  of  acids 
and  bases,  and  the  growth  of  plants  and  animals  P”1 
The  observation  of  religious  instincts,  of  ideals 
unrealized, 


Ihat  type  of  perfect  in  his  mind 
In  Nature  can  he  nowhere  find  ; 


of  moral  intuitions  and  indestructible  beliefs,  the 
very  capacity  of  self-reproach,  “  the  implicit  creed 
of  the  guilty these  facts  in  our  mental  constitu¬ 


tion  have  ever  been  held  to  presume  the  existence 
of  will  in  man  as  a  precedent  condition  of  their 
reality.  Nor  is  the  existence  of  such  instinctive  Testimony 

of  positive 

\  T/P’  Cult ■’  L  P'  2-  “"hei" 

it  has  indeed  been  urged  (chiefly  by  writers  of  the  school  of  Kant),  validity, 
that  presentiments  cannot  be  regarded  as  proofs  of  external  exist¬ 
ence.  Compare  Mr.  Hutton,  Essays ,  I.  26.  But  such  an  objection  is 
in  tiuth  suicidal,  striking  at  the  roots  of  all  knowledge.  Spinoza  said 
the  stone,  if  it  could  think,  would  account  its  gravitation  a  voluntary 


8  2 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


beliefs,  showing  an  uniform  but  independent 
genesis  in  different  places  and  times,  altogether 
denied  in  the  school  of  thought  which  I  have 
now  in  view.  Mr.  Mill,  indeed,  says  with  some 
causticity,  44  The  universal  voice  of  mankind,  so 
often  appealed  to,  is  universal  only  in  its  dis¬ 
cordance.”1  Yet  M.  Comte  recognizes  44  essential 
inclinations  of  the  intellect,”  44  primordial  tenden¬ 
cies,”  an  44  inherent  need  of  ideality,”  and  the  like. 
44  The  universality  of  religious  ideas,”  writes2  Mr. 
Herbert  Spencer,  44  their  independent  evolution 
among  different  primitive  races,  and  their  great 
vitality,  unite  in  showing  that  their  source  must  be 


movement ;  and  Leibnitz  (probably  with  the  dictum  of  Thales  (Arist. 
de  Anim.,  I.  2)  in  his  mind)  made  the  same  remark  of  the  magnet. 
But  Hegel  replies  that  with  thought  would  come  the  perception  of  an 
infinite  variety  of  motion,  which,  if  limited,  would  be  felt  as  compulsion. 
See  Weisse,  Vorlesungen,  p.  126. 

1  Dissert .,  II.  498.  See  Comte,  Phil.  Pos .,  VI.  642,  &c. 

2  First  Principles ,  pp.  10,  14.  And  again  (p.  4),  “  Admitting,  as 
we  must,  that  life  is  impossible  unless  through  a  certain  agreement 
between  internal  convictions  and  external  circumstances ;  admitting, 
therefore,  that  the  probabilities  are  always  in  favour  of  the  truth,  or  at 
least  the  partial  truth  of  a  conviction  ;  we  must  admit  that  the  convic¬ 
tions  entertained  by  many  minds  in  common  are  the  most  likely  to 
have  some  foundation.”  Cicero,  Nat.  D.,  I.  xvii.,  says  indeed  the  same 
thing.  De  quo  omnium  natura  consentit,  id  verum  esse  necesse  est. 
“  Ho  pre-assurance  common  to  a  whole  species  does  in  any  instance 
prove  delusive.  All  other  prophecies  of  nature  have  their  exact  fulfil¬ 
ment  in  every  other  ingrafted  word  of  promise.  Nature  is  found  true 
to  her  word  ;  and  is  it  in  her  noblest  creature  that  she  tells  her  first  lie  ?  ” 
—Coleridge,  A.  i?.,  p.  277.  Mr.  Mill,  Logic ,  II.  466,  sees  a  fallacy  of 
reasoning  in  a  circle  in  this  assertion  of  natural  or  instinctive  sentiments 
among  mankind.  But  he  has  no  right  to  demand  these  generalizations, 
any  more  than  others  in  nature,  to  be  unexceptionable  and  not  ap¬ 
proximate. 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


S3 


deep-seated  instead  of  superficial.”  u  A  postulate 
which  is  not  consciously  asserted,  but  unconsciously 
involved,  and  which  is  unconsciously  involved  not 
by  one  man  or  body  of  men,  but  by  numerous 
bodies  of  men,  who  diverge  in  countless  ways  and 
degrees  in  the  rest  of  their  beliefs,  has  a  warrant 
far  transcending  any  that  can  he  usually  shown.” 

“  That  religious  instincts,”  says  Mr.  Lecky,  “  are  as 
truly  a  part  of  our  nature  as  are  our  appetites  and 
our  nerves,  is  a  fact  which  all  history  establishes, 
and  which  forms  one  of  the  strongest  proofs  of  the 
reality  of  that  unseen  world  to  which  the  soul  of 
man  continually  tends.”  1  Is  their  testimony,  then, 
negatived  or  overthrown,  is  the  light  that  is  in 
them  darkened  by  our  increasing  acquaintance  with 
the  regularity  of  events  in  nature,  with  the  evolu¬ 
tion  of  animal  life,  or  with  the  automatic  develop¬ 
ment  of  faculties  ?  Of  this  class  of  notions,  it  may  They  are 
suffice  to  remark  that  even  if  instincts  be,  as  Mr.  Stent™” 
Darwin  believes,  “  inherited  habits,”  this  does  not  theory  of 

evolution, 

1  1 list.  European  Morals ,  I.  340.  Mr.  Mill,  Examination ,  p.  503,  ff., 
contends  that  we  are  not  conscious  of  free-will,  but  of  responsibility 
implying  free-will.  We  are,  he  admits,  conscious  of  a  feeling  that  we 
might  have  chosen  differently  had  we  preferred  to  do  so.  By  respon¬ 
sibility  is  meant  not  the  fact  of  future  punishment,  but  the  sense  that 
it  is  right  we  should  be  punished.  This,  argues  Mr.  Mill,  is  a  natural 
deterrent,  and  it  enables  a  man  to  help  acting  as  he  does.  If  so,  it 
renders  him  justly  liable  to  punishment.  I  cannot  see  how  it  does  on 
the  theory  of  Necessity,  which  admits,  as  Mr.  Mill  (p.  511)  half  seems 
to  perceive,  no  such  saving  clause.  It  is  of  course  always  open  to 
analyze  Conscience  into  association ;  viz.  a  gradually  formed  conviction 
that  as  we  are  accountable  to  man,  so  we  are  to  the  Deity.  But  such 
an  explanation  really  decides  nothing. 

a  2 


84 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  II. 


necessarily  mar  their  cogency  or  plausibility  of 


Reason  is  often  pressed, 
But  honest  Instinct  comes  a  volunteer.1 


The  standard  of  nature  is  the  perfect  and,  therefore, 
the  mature  instance.2  The  highest  stage  of  civiliza¬ 
tion  is,  in  the  truest  sense,  a  state  of  nature ;  nor  are 
instincts  confined  or  necessarily  correspondent  to 
the  primeval  beliefs  of  savages.  There  may  he  a 
rudimentary  belief,  natural  and  instinctive  to 
human  tribes,  which,  at  any  given  stage,  may  not 
have  yet  emerged  into  a  condition  which  can  he 
pronounced  as  definitely  apprehended.3  It  must  he 
remembered  that  results  obtained  through  evolu¬ 
tion,  being  strictly  natural,  may,  in  themselves,  be 
regarded  as  instinctive.  And,  certainly,  the  belief 
in  spiritual  beings,  the  conviction  of  the  existence 
of  an  all-seeing  Deity,  controlling  the  course  of 

1  “  Les  principes  se  sen  tent:  les  propositions  se  concluent.” — Pascal, 
Pensees,  II.  108.  Instinct,  says  De  Maistre,  is  like  an  Asymptote  to 
Reason,  ever  approaching  but  never  invading  its  domain. 

2  “  Num  dubitas  quin  specimen  naturse  capi  debeat  ex  optima  quaque 
natlira  ?  ” — Cic.,  Tusc.  Lisp .,  I.  xiv.  Ael  aKonelv  iv  rois  Kara  (fivaiu 
e'xovcn  pciWov  to  (pvcrei  Kal  pr)  iv  rois  dic(j)dappivoLS. — Arist.,  Pol.,  I. 
v.  5,  and  N.  Pth.,  IX.  ix.  8.  That  which  is  the  consummation  in  order 
of  time  or  development  is  the  original  or  end  respectively  in  the  order 
of  Nature. 

3  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer  indeed  holds  that  “  fundamental  moral  intui¬ 
tions  have  been  and  still  are  developing  in  our  race.”  The  abortion  of 
this  truth  is  to  hold  with  Feuerbach  that  the  Deity  Himself  is  a  creation 
of  the  human  conscience ;  that  man  has  made  God  in  the  likeness  of 
man.  Any  way  these  intuitions  must  be  regarded  as  facts  ;  and,  being 
parts  of  an  organization,  imply  design.  They  are  the  “practical 
proofs”  of  Bishop  Butler.  On  the  whole  question,  see  Comte,  Phil. 
Pos .,  IV.  624.  Waitz,  Anthrop.,  I.  322;  Tylor,  II.  Pr.  Cult.,  I.  384. 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


35 


events,  of  a  possible  communion  with  Him  as  the 
aim  and  end  of  being,  of  a  sense  of  duty  and 
responsibility,  of  the  existence,  present  and  future, 
of  the  soul,  and  other  similarly  connected  funda¬ 
mental  truths,  are  some  of  these.  Even  if  origi- 
nally  traceable  to  social  tendencies  and  social  ract.®F  of 
sympathies,  or,  which  we  cannot  admit,  to  inherited facts* 
experiences  of  utility}  accumulated  and  transmitted, 
and  thus  not  innate  but  acquired,  they  are  not  for 
that  reason  less  natural.  Such  instincts  may  be 
termed  derivative;2  but  they  still  speak  with  the 
voice  of  Nature  and  of  Nature’s  Grod,  and  their  testimony* 
utterance  is  this.  They  prove  that  community  of 
feeling  and  nature  with  the  Divine  which  is  denied 
or  ignored  in  the  philosophy  of  Nescience,  but  is  of 
the  essence  of  the  faith  of  Christ  ( rod  yap  Kal  yevos 
icrpev).  For  Christianity,  it  must  ever  be  re¬ 
membered,  is  no  mere  Monotheism  ;3  it  is  rather,  as 

1  Mr.  Spencer  says,  “Moral  intuitions  are  the  results  of  accumulated 
experiences  of  utility.  Gradually  organized  and  inherited,  they  have 
come  to  he  quite  independent  of  conscious  experience.”  See  Bain, 

Mental  and  M.  S.,  p.  722. 

2  See  Darwin,  Descent ,  II.  395,  and  J.  S.  Mill,  Utilitarianism ,  p.  45. 

Exam,  of  Sir  W.  Hamilton ,  p.  167.  The  question  whether  we  have, 
given  in  consciousness,  an  immediate  intuition  of  God,  is  not  essential  ; 
we  are  at  least  conscious  of  truths  which  render  the  existence  of  God 
matter  of  inference. 

3  As  a  form  of  Monotheism,  Christianity  might  he  nothing  more  than 
the  outcome  of  the  development  of  our  race.  Thus  Mr.  Tylor,  Hist. 

Pr.  C.,  II.  302,  regards  the  religion  of  savages  as  a  polytheism  which 
culminates  in  the  worship  of  one  God.  Humboldt  in  a  fine  passage 
shows  that  Monotheism  alone  is  consistent  with  a  view  of  the  unities  of 
Nature,  of  the  order  of  the  universe.  “  Es  ist  ein  charakterisches 
Kennzeichen  del*  Naturpoesie  der  Ilebraer,  class  als  Beflex  des  Monothe- 


86 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


it  lias  been  called,  Theanthropism,  the  taking  of  the 
manhood  into  God. 

raised t|jy1  §  i i .  It  is  a  difficult y  more  apparent  than  real, 

tioniftV°lu"  a  apprehensive  and  recipient  of  will 

answered,  should,  if  indeed  it  be  so,  be  descended  from  pro¬ 
genitors  without  it.  It  is  evident  when  we  take 
into  account  the  expansive  force  of  mind  and  the 
vast  differences  which  sever  civilized  from  barba¬ 
rous  tribes,  that,  whatever  his  origin,  man’s  capacity 
for  improvement,  or,  as  we  should  prefer  to  term 
it,  renovation,  is  practically  infinite.  Nor  is  it 
easy  to  say  where  a  difference  of  degree  in  respect 
of  faculties  may  merge  into  one  of  kind.  An  illus¬ 
tration  of  this  truth  may  be  found  in  the  long- 
delayed  maturity  of  the  more  complex  and  highly 
endowed  embryos,  which  yet  recall,  in  various 
stages  of  growth  and  infancy,  the  rudimentary 
phases  of  specific  evolution.  If  the  sense  of  per¬ 
sonality,  of  responsibility  and  moral  consciousness 
be  our  guarantee  of  the  soul’s  reality,  it  may  afford 
some  clue  to  the  point  of  transition  from  animal 
to  human  existence  in  the  higher  and  truer  sense. 
Doubtless  66  there  is  a  natural  body,  and  there  is  a 
spiritual.  Howbeit  “  that  was  not  first  which  is 

ismus,  sie  stets  das  Gauze  des  Weltalls  in  seiner  Einheit  umfasst 
scwohl  das  Erdenleben,  als  die  leuchtenden  Himmelsraume.  Sie  weilt 
seltener  bei  dcm  Einzelnen  der  Erscheinung,  sondern  erfreut  sich  der 
Anschauung  grosser  Massen.  Man  mochte  sagen,  dass  in  dem  einzigen 
10E  Psalm  das  Bild  des  ganzen  Kosmos  dargelegt  ist,”  &c.  On  Chris¬ 
tianity  as  wholly  depending  on  the  doctrine  of  the  Incarnation,  see 
Dorner,  Doct.  of  Person  of  Christ ,  I.  2,  sub  init.,  and  Dr.  Westcott  in  his 
able  critique  of  Comte  on  Christianity ,  Cord.  Rev.,  VI.  418. 


87 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


spiritual.”  We  may  have  “borne  the  image  of 
the  heavenly.”  It  is  probably  through  the  Relation 
medium  of  sensation  that  we  learn  to  distinguish  to  the 

,  ,  ,  animal 

a  knowledge  world, 
too  wonderful  and  excellent  for  the  mere  brute  : 


our  separate  personality.  Yet  it  is 


he  cannot  attain  to  it.  The  moral  qualities  which 
he  displays 1  are  probably  derived  from  his  inter¬ 
course  with  man,  and  admit  of  very  limited  culture. 

So  with  the  sense  of  immortality,  of  freedom,  and 
responsible  activity.  Part  of  the  native  generic 
consciousness  of  our  race,  this  may  yet  he  de¬ 
veloped  slowly,  partially,  precariously.2  Still  the 
fact  of  such  development  remains  with  its  atten¬ 
dant  consequences  ;  for  which  the  same  evidence 
exists  as  determines  the  reality  of  all  our  know¬ 
ledge. 

§  12.  The  old  familiar  generalization  that  there  Admitted 
is  no  effect  without  a  cause 3  has  been  so  far  ex-  of  the  y 

course  of 

1  “  Take  an  example  of  a  dog,  and  mark  what  a  generosity  and  coil-  ^atuie‘ 
rage  he  will  put  on  when  he  finds  himself  maintained  by  a  man,  who  to 

him  is  instead  of  a  God  or  melior  natura ;  which  courage  is  manifestly 
such  as  that  creature  without  that  confidence  of  a  better  nature  than  his 
own,  could  never  attain.” — Bacon,  Essay  on  Atheism.  Augustine,  Civ.  Dei , 

XI.  xxvii.,  remarks,  “  Verumtamen  inest  sensibus  irrationalium  animan- 
tium  etsi  scientia  nullo  modo,  at  certc  quaedam  sciential  similitude.” 

2  See  Mr.  Picton’s  able  speculations  in  New  Theories  and  Old  Faith , 

Lect.  II.,  &c.  The  “  survival  of  the  fittest ,”  in  spite  of  Mr.  Spencer’s 
answer  to  Mr.  Martineau  ( Cont .  Dev.,  XX.  147),  implies  to  my  mind 
pre-arrangement  and  a  directive  Will.  The  benevolence  of  the  origina¬ 
ting  Mind  requires  a  distinct  proof. 

3  Of  this  Leibnitz,  Theod.,  I.  §  44,  remarks :  “  Sans  ce  grand  principe 
nous  ne  pourrions  jamais  prouver  l’existence  de  Dieu.”  An  illustration 
of  his  method  will  be  found  in  his  Confessio  Naturae  contra  Atheistas 
(  Works,  pp.  45,  46,  ed.  Erdmann),  and  Theodicee ,  I.  §  7.  Dieu  est  la 
premiere  raison  des  choses,  &c. 


88 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


Leads 
to  the 
acknow¬ 
ledgment 
of  a  First 
Cause. 


tended  in  experience  as  to  receive  the  addition, 
and  one  which  is  itself  uniform.  Thus  if  Physical 
Science  should  ever  ultimately  resolve  the  bulk  of 
natural  facts  into  forces,  compounds  into  sub¬ 
stances,  organic  structures  into  inorganic,  or 
inorganic  into  organic,  vital  into  material,  or 
material  into  vital ;  these  forces,  we  may  presume, 
will  be  found  to  be  qualified ;  for  else  they  would 
be  incapable  of  differentiation.  Or  if  ultimately 
resoluble  into  a  single  force,  this  must,  so  far  as 

we  can  conceive,  be  itself  qualified ,  to  be  what 
it  is.1 

Eternal  form  must  still  divide 
The  eternal  soul  from  all  beside. 

But  as  that  which  is  itself  the  origin  of  move¬ 
ment  to  all  other  things,  must  be  either  self-caused, 
that  is,  can  in  no  manner  be  itself  an  effect ; 2  or 
must  be  in  its  operation  eternal  a  parte  ante ;  it  is 
necessary  to  determine  the  alternative.  It  is  not 
enough  to  say  with  one  of  its  most  distinguished 
teachers 3  that  “  the  positive  philosophy  does  not 
busy  itself  with  the  beginnings  of  the  universe,  it 
the  universe  had  a  beginning.”  Or,  again,  with 

1  “  Cette  idee  de  l’espece  qui  scrait  inherente  au  germe,  c’est  un  prin- 

eipe  qui  depasse  toutes  les  donnees  du  materialisme.” — Janet,  Le  Mat. 
Contemporain,  p.  115. 

2  Comp.  Arist.,  Metaph.,  XL  vi.  vii.;  Plnys .,  VIII.;  Plato,  Phcedrm 
p.  245.  Compare  Sir  W.  Hamilton’s  argument,  Lect.  I.  60,  to  show 
that  philosophy,  as  the  knowledge  of  effects  in  their  causes,  tends  not  to 
a  pluiality  of  ultimate  causes,  but  towards  one.  Comte  views  the  resolu¬ 
tion  of  laws  or  forces  into  unity  as  chimerical. 

3  Littre,  Paroles  de  Phil.  Pos.,  p.  53. 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


89 

one  of  its  most  distinguished  critics,1  that  “  the 
positive  mode  of  thought  is  not  necessarily  a  denial 
of  the  supernatural,  since  it  merely  throws  hack 
the  question  to  the  origin  of  all  things.  If  the 
universe  had  a  beginning,  its  beginning  by  the 
very  conditions  of  the  case  was  supernatural ;  the 
laws  of  Nature  cannot  account  for  their  own 
origin.”  This,  we  reply,  is  to  renounce  a  legiti¬ 
mate  function  of  man’s  intelligence,2  the  “  obstinate 
questionings  of  sense  and  outward  things”  ;  and  to 
quench  within  him  an  ever-rising  instinct  of 
inquiry  into  the  origin  of  the  world  of  nature. 
His  understanding  and  reason,  no  less  than  his 
moral  faculties,  direct  him  to  its  solution.  Of  the 

1  J.  S.  Mill,  A.  Comte  and  Positivism ,  p.  15. 

2  Tentat  enim  dubiam  mentem  rationis  egestas, 

Ecqumnam  fuerit  mundi  genitalis  origo. — Lucret.,  v.  1210. 

See  lie  Maistre,  Soirees ,  Vme  Entret.  “  II  ne  depend  nullement  de  nous 
de  n’y  pas  regarder.  11  est  la  devant  nous,”  &c.  M.  Comte,  Phil.  Pos., 
IV.  669,  calls  it  “  an  infantine  curiosity  which  pretends  to  know  the 
origin  and  end  of  all  things.”  Not  so  Leibnitz.  “  Rien  ne  marque 
mieux  l’imperfection  d’une  philosophic  que  la  necessite  ou  le  philosoplie 
se  trouve  d’avouer  qu’il  se  passe  quel  que  chose  suivant  son  systemedont 
il  ny  a  aucune  raison.” — Theod .,  II.  §  340.  “Moi,  je  crois  qu’il  y  faut 
reconnoitre  des  marques  de  la  force  de  l’esprit  humain  qui  le  faitpenetrer 
dans  1  interieur  des  choses.  Ce  sont  des  ouvertures  nouvelles  et  pour 
ainsi  dire  des  rayons  de  l’aube  du  jour  qui  nous  promet  une  lumiere 
plus  grande.” — lb.,  Disc.,  §  81.  Kant,  though  holding  that  no  theo¬ 
logical  beliefs  can  be  based  on  cosmological  notions,  Prolegg.  §  44,  yet 
finds  a  firm  foundation  in  the  ideas  which  are  the  offspring  of  Reason, 
such  as  the  soul,  the  world,  and  God.  Whewell,  Bridgeivcder  Tr ., 
p.  159,  ed.  Bohn,  observes  that  “  the  same  reasoning  faculty  which  seeks 
for  the  origin  of  the  present  state  of  things,  and  is  capable  of  assenting 
to,  or  dissenting  from,  the  hypothesis  propounded,  is  necessarily  led  to 
seek  in  the  same  manner  for  the  origin  of  any  previous  state  of  things,” 
&c.  See  also  Indications  of  the  Creator,  p.  153. 


90 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


The  alter-  alternatives  before  him,  the  eternity  of  matter  is 

native  of  7  *  . 

an  eternity  liable  to  many  objections,1  one  only  of  which  needs 

of  matter  .  °  J 

here  to  be  noticed.  While  science  nowhere  con¬ 
tradicts  the  fact  of  a  beginning,  its  absence  is 
inconsistent  and  in  the  judgment  of  the  highest 
authorities  in  physical  philosophy  incompatible 
with  the  state  of  our  knowledge  of  Nature 

rejected  ( Werderi)  as  a  continuous  effect,  and  of  natural 

by  natural  7 

pinio-  agents  and  their  mode  of  operation  as  causes. 

sophers.  L 

Ihus  astronomy,  in  the  opinion  of  Professor 
Huxley  2  66  leads  us  to  contemplate  phenomena,  the 
very  nature  of  which  demonstrates  that  they  must 
have  had  a  beginning,  and  that  they  must  have 
an  end.”  “The  principle  of  the  dissipation  of 
energy,”  according  to  another  distinguished  pro¬ 
fessor,3  “  as  it  alone  is  able  to  lead  us  by  sure  steps 

1  As,  for  example,  that  it  really  explains  nothing :  geternitas  quippe 
nullius  rei  causa  intelligi  potest. 

2  Lay  Sermons,  p.  17,  probably  referring  to  the  fact  of  the  earth’s 
retardation  in  a  resisting  medium.  Comp.  Whewell,  Bridy.  Tr .,  Bk.  II. 
c.  viii.  Sir  John  Herschel,  Disc.  Nat.  Phil.,  §  28,  says  :  “  If  we  mis¬ 
take  not,  then,  the  discoveries  alluded  to  effectually  destroy  the  idea  of 
an  eternal,  self -existent  matter ,  by  giving  to  each  of  its  atoms  the  essen¬ 
tial  characters  at  once  of  a  manufactured  article  and  a  subordinate  agent.” 

3  Professor  Tait,  Deport  of  British  Assoc.,  1871.  He  adds,  “  Sir  William 
Thomson’s  splendid  suggestion  of  Vortex  Atoms  implies  the  absolute 
necessity  of  an  intervention  of  creative  power  to  form  or  to  destroy  one 
atom  even  of  dead  matter.”  Dr.  Whewell,  Indications,  pp.  14, 17,  115, 
remarks,  “A  perpetual  motion  is  impossible  in  chemistry  as  it  is  in 
mechanics;  and  a  theory  of  constant  change  continued  throughout 
infinite  time  is  untenable  when  asserted  upon  chemical  no  less  than 
upon  mechanical  principles.”  Liebig,  23  Brief  ap.  Lange,  Gesch.  des 
Mat.,  p.  342,  considers  the  same  to  be  proved  by  physiology.  Die 
exakte  Naturforscliung  hat  bcwiesen,  dass  das  organische  Lebcn  auf 
Erden  einen  Anfang  hatte. 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


91 


of  deductive  reasoning  to  the  necessary  future  ot 
the  universe  (necessary,  that  is,  if  physical  laws 
for  ever  remain  unchanged) ;  so  it  enables  us  to 
say  that  the  present  order  of  things  has  not  been 
evolved  through  infinite  past  time  by  the  agency 
of  laws  now  at  work ;  but  must  have  had  a  dis¬ 
tinctive  beginning,  a  state  beyond  which  we  are 
totally  unable  to  penetrate ;  a  state,  in  fact,  which 
must  have  been  produced  by  other  than  the  now 
acting  causes.”  We  may  dismiss,  then,  the  theory 
of  the  eternity  of  matter,  and  with  it  some  ancient 
fancies  which,  while  admitting  a  creation,  supposed 
it  to  be  coeval  with  the  Creator  as  being  of  His 
essence.1  But  if  self-caused  or  altogether  motive  The  First 
and  yet  material ,  the  ultimate  force  in  natural  creative 
phenomena  turns  out  to  be  wholly  and  inherently 
different  from  the  effects  for  which  it  is  required 
to  account.  It  is  contrary  to  all  experience,  and 
all  our  knowledge  of  matter,  such  as  it  is,  is  gained 
from  experience.2  Its  raison  d'etre,  therefore,  dis- 

1  See  Milman,  Lat.  Christ .,  VI.  279.  “Nature  and  Time  were 
created  together,”  is  the  truer  thought  of  Scotus  Erigena  (ap.  Guizot, 

Civil,  en  France ,  Lee.  28).  See,  however,  Milman  (lb.,  III.  244),  after 
Haureau.  Saisset  indeed  ( Essais ),  while  quoting  Augustine  and  Leib¬ 
nitz  as  inclining  to  the  opinion  of  the  eternity  and  infinity  of  the 
universe,  remarks,  “  Dieu  a  toujours  ete  avant  les  creatures  sans  jamais 
existcr  sans  elles ;  parce  qu’il  ne  les  precede  point  par  un  intervalle  de 
temps,  mais  par  une  eternite  fixe.” 

2  “Laws  of  Matter”  imply  a  distinction  between  matter  and  form, 
and  by  consequence  an  original  conception  of  matter  which  is  meta¬ 
physical  rather  than  physical,  and  involves  a  whole  theory.  With  the 
admission  that  we  know  nothing  of  'physical  causes  materialism  pro¬ 
perly  disappears. 


and  im¬ 
material, 


92  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  II. 

appears.  It  is  opposed  to  that  great  generaliza¬ 
tion  of  modern  science,  known  as  the  conservation 
of  energy  or  persistence  of  force.  61  A.  cv cation 
of  power,”  says  Faraday,1  uis  like  no  other  force 
in  nature.  .  .  •  In  no  case,  not  even  m  those  of 
the  gymnotus  or  torpedo ,  is  there  a  pure  creation  or 
a  production  of  power  without  a  corresponding 
exhaustion  of  something  to  supply  it.  It  must 
then,  this  ultimate  force  or  centre,  or  more  strictly 
this  origin  of  force,  he  other  than  material  in 
character  and  essence.  No  theory  of  tension  or 
pressure,  or  of  their  co-existence,  is  adecpiaie  to  the 
case  supposed.  All  motion  with  which  we  are 
acquainted  has  its  commencement  in  some  pie- 
existing  source  of  power.  If  physical,  it  is  itself 
an  effect.  For  all  experience  and  observation,  not 
to  rest  upon  principles  of  reason,  lead  us  to  con¬ 
clude  that  there  is  no  phenomenon  in  nature  which 
is  uncaused.  But  if  itself  a  cause  and  immaterial, 
a  new  mode  of  agency  is  introduced  into  the 
universe.  True ;  and  it  is  this  consideration  which 
answers  the  objection  that  if  there  can  be  some¬ 
thing  uncaused,  there  is  no  reason  to  assume  a 
cause  for  anything.  It  is  one,  moreover,  the  mode 
of  whose  operation  must  always  remain  inacces- 

1  Life ,  II.  p.  103.  “  Perpetual  motion  is  deemed  impossible,  because 

it  demands  the  creation  of  force,  whereas  the  principle  of  conservation 
is  no  creation  but  infinite  conversion.”  —  Prof.  Tyndall,  Fragments, 
p.  35.  Sir  Isaac  Newton  in  liis  Letters  to  Bentley  leaves  it  to  his 
readers  to  determine  whether  the  agent  which  produces  gravitation  is 
material  or  immaterial. 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


93 


sible  to  our  present  living  powers,  one  which  may¬ 
be  fitly  termed  super-essential.  It  answers,  there-  “s^nng 
fore,  the  criterion  laid  down  by  modern  thinkers,  notions  of 

^  spiritual 

of  “  an  omnipresence  of  something  which  passes  action, 
comprehension.” 1  The  action  of  mind  or  spirit 
upon  matter  (whether  properly  to  be  considered 
supernatural  or  not)  seems  incapable  of  determina¬ 
tion,  if  for  no  other  reason,  that  it  cannot  even  by 
reflection  see  itself.2  This  cannot  therefore 

Come 

Into  the  eye  and  prospect  of  the  soul. 

One  thing  only  can  we  infer  respecting  it  in  the 
case  of  the  Primal  Mind  or  Eternal  Spirit.  This 
cannot  be  subject  to  laws  in  the  same  sense  as  the  free  in 

J  operation. 

phenomena  of  Nature.  It  must  be,  as  the  type  of 
pure  action,  free  in  operation;  and,  if  not  in¬ 
different  but  capable  of  motive  (for  motives  are 
not  necessarily  “symptoms  of  weakness”),  it 
must  be  self-determined,  “  a  law  unto  itself.”  It 
seems,  then,  impossible  to  assert  that  there  can  be 


1  Herbert  Spencer,  First  Princ p.  45. 

2  “Modus  quo  corporibus  adhseret  spiritus  comprehendi  ab  liomi- 
nibus  non  potest :  et  hoc  tamen  homo  est.” — Augustin,  de  Spir.  et  Anim. 
“  Ubi  igitur  aut  qualis  est  ista  mens  ?  Ubi  tua  aut  qualis  ?  Potesne 
dicere?  .  .  .  Non  valet  tantum  animus  ut  sese  ipse  videat.  At,  ut 
oculus,  sic  animus,  se  non  videns,  alia  cernit.” — Cic.,  Fuse.  Disp., 
1.  xxvii.  “  En  un  mot,”  says  Leibnitz,  “  que  l’ame  change  la  quantity 
de  la  force,  et  qu’elle  change  la  ligne  de  la  direction,  ce  sont  deux 
cboses  ^galement  inexplicables.”  Hence  bis  supposition  of  a  paral- 
lelismus  inter  corpus  et  animam ,  and  the  several  theories  of  a  physical 
influx,  of  a  Divine  assistance,  of  occasional  causes,  due  respectively  to 
Thomas  Aquinas,  Descartes,  and  Malebranche. 


94 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


Analogy 
of  the 
human 
will. 


This  line 
of  proof, 
being  from 
pheno¬ 
mena, 
suitable 
to  the 
demands 
of  Posi¬ 
tivism. 


nothing  homologons  or  at  the  least  analogous  to 
such  a  mode  of  agency1  in  the  case  of  human  voli¬ 
tion  and  moral  causation.  Why  should  it  be 
thought  a  thing  incredible  that  man  should  exist 
in  the  image  and  likeness  of  Grod,  who  made  him?2 

§  13.  In  this  argument  it  has  been  sufficient  to 
view  the  Divine  Being  as  only  a  logical  postulate 
in  the  scale  of  causation.  I  have  done  so,  not,  of 
course  willingly,  (for  who,  after  all,  can  love  or 
reverence  a  probable  or  even  a  demonstrated  Grod  ?) 

1  “  Sicut  ab  exemplari,  non  secundum  sequalitatem  ” — Thom.  Aq., 

Sum.,  I.  i.,  p.  93,  Art.  I.,  and  see  Origen,  c.  Cels.,  VI.  lxiii.  “  II  est 
vrai  que  Dieu  est  le  seul  dont  faction  est  pure  et  sans  melange  de 
ce  qu’on  appelle  pdtir :  mais  cela  iPempeche  pas  que  la  creature  n’ait 
part  aux  actions  aussi,  puisque  Paction  de  la  creature  est  une  modifi¬ 
cation  de  la  substance  qui  en  coule  naturellement,  et  qui  renferme 
une  variation  non-seulement  dans  les  perfections  que  Dieu  a  com¬ 
muniques  a  la  creature,  mais  encore  dans  les  limitations  qu’elle  y 
apporte  d’elle-meme  pour  etre  ce  qu’elle  est.” — Leibnitz,  The'od.,  Pt.  I., 
§  32.  “  Causa  itaque  rerum  qum  facit  nec  fit,  Deus  est.  Alise  vero 

causae  et  faciunt  et  hunt ;  sicut  sunt  omnes  creati  spiritus  et  maxime 
rationales.  Corporales  autem  causae,  quae  magis  hunt  quam  faciunt,  non 
sunt  inter  causas  efficientes  annumerandae  :  quoniam  hoc  possunt  quod 
ex  ipsis  faciunt  spirituum  voluntates.” — August.,  Civ.  D.,  V.  ix. 

2  Thus  is  it  literally  true,  ubi  spiritus  Domini,  ibi  libertas  (to 

voepov  Kai  avre^ovcnov).  Cf.  Delitzsch,  Biblical  Psych.,  p.  84,  E.  T. 
“  Man  in  perfection  of  nature  being  made  according  to  the  likeness 
of  his  Maker,  resembleth  Him  also  in  the  manner  of  His  working :  so 
that  whatsoever  we  work  as  men,  the  same  we  do  wittingly  work  and 
freely :  neither  are  we  according  to  the  manner  of  natural  agents  so 
tied,  but  that  it  is  in  our  power  to  leave  the  things  we  do  undone.” — 
Hooker,  Eccl.  Pol.,  I.  vii.  2.  “  God  created  man  in  His  own  image : 

to  be  the  image  of  His  own  eternity  created  He  man  !  Of  eternity  and 
self-existence  what  other  likeness  is  possible,  but  immortality  and 
moral  self-determination?” — Coleridge,  Friend,  I.  146.  See  the  whole 
passage.  Comp.  Hazard  on  The  Will,  Pt.  I.  “  Well  said  Saint  Chrys¬ 
ostom  with  his  lips  of  gold,  ‘  The  true  Shekinah  is  man.’  ” — Carlyle, 
S.  JR.,  p.  44. 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


95 


but  because  of  some  prevailing  modes  of  thought 
which  should,  where  possible,  be  encountered  on 
common  ground.1  The  original  sin  of  Positivism 
is  the  refusal  to  acknowledge  the  idea  of  a  true 
efficient  cause  (also  a  final  one)  to  the  universe, 
which  thus  emerges  from  nothing,  and  ends  in 
nothing.2  Though  philosophy  properly  denies  to 
the  human  mind  the  knowledge  of  an  efficient  or 
physical  cause  to  phenomena,  it  cannot,  as  it  seems 
to  me,  ignore  the  necessity  of  a  First  Cause  ;  or,  as 
a  fact  in  nature,  of  the  common  sense  of  a  Divine 
original.  A  double  error  is  committed.  Engrossed 
with  the  material  world,  the  subjective  portion  of 
the  universe,  with  its  necessities  and  claims,  is 

1  See  Janet’s  remarks,  La  Crise  Philosophique ,  p.  106.  “  No  gene¬ 

ralisation,”  it  has  been  truly  said,  “  of  the  phenomena  of  space,  of  time, 
of  matter,  or  of  force,  can  become  a  religious  conception.” — H.  Spencer, 
First  Princ .,  p.  23.  Thus  Pascal  argued  that  from  number  we  know 
there  is  an  Infinite,  but  not  its  nature — only  it  must  be  different  from 
any  aggregation  of  number.  But  while  admitting  with  Dean  Mansel, 
Aids  to  Faith ,  p.  25,  that  “  mind  and  not  matter  is  the  truer  image 
of  God,”  following  Kant,  Kritik,  Werke,  II.  478-81,  I  cannot  but 
think  Sir  W.  Hamilton  goes  too  far  in  his  assertion  that  “  the  phe¬ 
nomena  of  matter,  taken  by  themselves,  do  not  warrant  any  inference 
to  the  existence  of  a  God.” — Lect.  on  Metaph.,  I.  p.  26.  See  some  good 
remarks  of  Mr.  Mill,  Exam.,  p.  491,  on  the  danger  of  sacrificing  suc¬ 
cessively  one  kind  of  evidence  to  another. 

2  See  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  IV.  388.  I  have  already  remarked  (p.  65) 
on  the  inconsistency  of  Comtism,  in  that,  forsaking  its  fundamental 
Materialism,  it  reverts  to  a  worship  of  humanity,  “  le  Grand  litre.” 
Comte’s  own  words  were  in  a  manner  prophetic.  Speaking  of  those 
who  give  up  Positivism  after  holding  it,  and  that  they  pass  tem¬ 
porarily  into  Pantheism,  “  l’esprit,”  he  says,  “  retombe  involontaire- 
ment  dans  la  theologie  ordinaire,  la  seule  solide  et  consequente ,  parce 
qu’elle  a  ete  construite  par  des  esprits  d’unc  toute  autre  trempe.” — 
Littre,  p.  174. 


96 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


neglected;  while  further  in  the  analysis  of  the 
object  itself  one  antecedent  in  causation  is  omitted. 
The  connection  of  such  a  frame  of  thought  with 
Pantheism  is  a  very  close  one.  For  the  essence  of 
nine  o°fC'  Pant^eism  lies  in  insisting  on  a  necessary  coalition 
th^remedy  Infinite  with  the  finite.1  Its  precursor  is 

theism'  ^ie  al3SorPti°n  °f  flie  individual  in  the  general,  of 
the  personal  in  nature.  Its  antidote  is  the  dogma 
of  a  creation,  not,  indeed,  from  eternity,  but  in 
time ;  for  eternity  is  no  attribute  of  the  finite.  In 
this  sense  only  is  it  true  to  say  with  Carlyle, 
(though  the  expression  is  not  altogether  free  from 
objection),  that  “  Nature,  which  is  the  time-vesture 
of  God,  and  reveals  Him  to  the  wise,  hides  Him 
from  the  foolish.” 2  Nor  can  the  view  be  ad¬ 
mitted  which  is  held  by  some  leading  physicists 
of  our  time,  who,  while  rejecting  materialism  from 
their  creed,3  look  upon  matter  (after  Goethe)  as 

1  Hence  the  theories  of  an  “  Anima  Mundi  as  though  the  world 
could  he  considered  as  an  animal  or  a  substance.  See  Leibnitz,  Works , 
p.  564,  ed.  Erdmann.  “  Personality,”  says  Feuerbach  with  truth,  “  is 
the  antidote  to  Pantheism.” — Ess.  of  Christianity ,  p.  220. 

2  Sartor  Resartus,  p.  183.  What  Bossuet  said  of  Polytheism,  is  true 
of  Pantheism,  “  Tout  est  Dieu :  excepte  Dieu  meme.” 

3  Thus  Prof.  Huxley  (on  Yeast,  Cont.  Rev.,  XIX.  36)  states  that  “one 
great  object  of  £  Protoplasm  ’  is  to  show  that  what  is  called  ‘  mate¬ 
rialism’  has  no  sound  philosophical  basis.”  Lange  ( Gesch .  des  Mate- 
rialismus,  p.  238)  most  truly  remarks,  “  Dies  ist  in  der  That  die  Stel- 
lung  unserer  meisten  heutigen  ‘  Materialisten.’  Sie  sind  wesentlich 
Skeptiker  .  sie  glauben  nicht  mehr  dass  die  Materie,  wie  sie  unsercn 
Sinnen  erscheint,  die  letzte  Losung  alter  Blithsel  der  Natur  enthalte  : 
allein  sie  verfahren  grundsatzlich  als  ob  es  so  sei,  und  warten,  his 
i knen  aus  den  positiven  Wissenschaften  selbst  eine  Hothigung  zu 
anderen  Ann  ah  men  entgegentritt.” 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


97 


an  omnipresent  form  in  which  the  unknown  cause 
is  manifested  to  us.  They  seem  to  regard  it  as 
noble  only  because,  after  all,  it  is  incomprehen¬ 
sible  ;  and  are  at  least  as  ready  to  formulate  all 
phenomena  even  of  life,  mind,  and  society,  in 
terms  of  matter,  motion,  and  force,  as  in  any  other 
terms.1  A  latent  assumption  here  lurks  under  a 
professed  nescience. 

§  14.  It  is  not  enough  to  urge  that  Positivism 
does  not  in  its  principles  negate  Deity  or  render 
God  impossible.  It  seeks  not  to  require  Him.  As 
a  system  it  leaves  no  mysteries  ;  it  resolves  all  into 
laws  of  physical  agents;  it  has  no  Heaven;2  it 
professedly  renounces  all  concern  with  what 
happens  to  living  things  after  their  death ;  or,  as 
it  is  said,  “  at  the  consummation  of  the  ages,  if  the 
ages  have  a  consummation.”  It  makes  the  attempt 
to  divide  the  area  of  knowledge3  into  Sciences 


Faulty 
identifica¬ 
tion  of 
matter 
with  the 
Divine 
mind  by 
present 
thinkers. 


Defects  of 
Positivism 
as  an  ex¬ 
planation 
of  phe¬ 
nomena. 


1  See  Prof.  Huxley,  Lay  S.,  Lecture  on  Descartes.  Tyndall,  Fragm. 
of  Thought ,  p.  87.  H.  Spencer,  Princ.  of  Psych.,  I.  §  63,  272.  First 
Princ.,  pp.  222,  280,  502.  It  would  seem  evident  that  if  the  notion  of 
an  intelligent  First  Cause  is  in  abeyance,  all  progress  and  morality 
become  at  most  facts,  and  are  no  longer  laws  of  the  universe. 

2  Mr.  Morley,  Grit.  Misc.,  p.  257,  speaks  of  Goethe  as  the  poet  of 
that  “  new  faith  which  is  as  yet  without  any  universally  recognized 
label ;  but  whose  Heaven  is  an  ever  closer  harmony  between  the  con¬ 
sciousness  of  man  and  all  the  natural  forces  of  the  universe,  whose 
liturgy  is  culture,  and  whose  Deity  is  a  certain  high  composure  of  the 
human  heart.  The  tendency  of  Positivism  in  declining  to  investigate 
causes,  is  to  omit  the  notion  of  cause  altogether.  This  reduces  all  forms 
of  existence  to  modifications  of  a  substance,  i.  e.  to  Spinozism. 

Phil.  Pos.,  Lefon  II.  and  V.,  pp.  13, 14.  G.  H.  Lewes,  Comtes  Phil, 
of  Sciences,  p.  41.  Littre,  Paroles,  p.  33.  “  La  philosophie  Positive  ne 

nie  rien,  naffirme  rien  :  car  nier  ou  affirmer  ce  serait  declarer  que  l’on  a 

II 


98 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


and  in  its 
definition 
of  causa¬ 
tion, 


Concrete,  those  relative  to  beings  or  objects,  and 
Sciences  Abstract,  those  relative  to  events ;  that  is, 
to  the  general  laws  and  possibilities  of  operation. 
But  this  encyclopaedic  purview  of  the  realm  of 
knowledge  will  be  found  defective.  A  fact  in 
nature,  the  elementary  atom  of  a  positive  system, 
is  not  simply  explained 1  by  an  enumeration  of 
physical  agents  working  uniformly  or  under  fixed 
laws.  The  collocation  or  co-presence  of  those 
agents  is  a  necessary  condition  of  the  result,  and 
should  form  part  of  the  definition  of  causation. 
But  of  this  co-existence  and  combination  of  pheno¬ 
mena,  or  of  the  part-causes  of  phenomena,  of  the 
organism  with  its  environment,  no  scientific 
account  can  be  rendered.  It  is  a  fact  unique,  sui 
generis ,  yet  undoubtedly  a  fact;  and  it  is  incumbent 
on  a  positive  philosophy  to  estimate  and  include  it. 
Neither  atomic  particles  nor  elemental  forces  can 
be  “  the  joint  artists  of  their  own  combinations.” 

une  connaissance  quelconque  de  l’origine  des  etres  et  de  leur  fin.”  “  An 
dela  de  ces  deux  termes,  Matiere  et  Force,  la  Science  Positive  ne  connait 
rien.” — Principes ,  Pref.,  II. 

1  This  is  recognized  by  Mr.  Mill,  Logic,  I.  417, 549,  II.  44.  “The  ele¬ 
ment  which  is  not  a  law  of  causation  but  a  collocation  of  causes,  cannot 

itself  be  reduced  to  any  law . The  utmost  disorder  is  apparent  in 

the  combination  of  the  causes,  which  is  consistent  with  the  most  perfect 
order  in  their  effects.  For  when  each  agent  carries  on  its  own  operations 
according  to  an  uniform  law,  even  the  most  capricious  combination  of 
agencies  will  generate  a  regularity  of  some  sort,  as  we  see  in  the  kaleido¬ 
scope,  where  any  casual  arrangement  of  coloured  bits  of  glass  produces, 
by  the  laws  of  reflection,  a  beautiful  regularity  in  the  effect.”  This 
remark,  it  will  be  observed,  assumes  the  uniformity  of  the  operation  of 
the  agencies  in  accounting  for  the  order  resulting  in  their  effects. 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


99 


In  any  co-arrangement  the  principle  or  operating 
cause  of  the  combination  must  be  taken  into 
account.1  The  unity  evident  in  the  universe 
cannot  be  explained  out  of  its  mere  component 
parts.  So,  in  the  sequence  of  events,  a  commence¬ 
ment  must  be  sought  exterior  to  the  phenomena 
themselves,  sufficient  to  account,  not  only  for  their 
origination,  but  for  their  order  of  existence.  Of 
such  a  kind  is  our  notion  of  Divine  agency  deter¬ 
mining  in  whatever  manner,  mediately  or  imme¬ 
diately,  the  arrangement  of  physical  events.  But  in 
the  infinite  play  of  consequences  dependent  on  the 
variation  of  antecedents  in  time  or  space  and 
admitting  of  endless  modification,  the  consent  of 
the  human  will  may  find  a  place.2  Homogeneous 
in  its  ultimate  independence  with  the  operation 
of  Divine  purpose,  it  is  yet  essentially  distinct  in 
being  conditioned  in  its  exercise,  subordinate, 


which 
should 
include  ail 
account 
of  the 
collocation 
of  phe¬ 
nomena. 


Its  relation 
to  Divine 
and  human 
agency. 


1  Coleridge,  A.  JR.,  pp.  44,  313. 

2  “  Conceive,”  says  M.  Guizot,  Civ.  in  Europe ,  1. 197,  ed.  Bohn,  “  a 

great  machine  of  which  the  idea  resides  in  a  single  mind,  and  of  which 
the  different  pieces  are  confided  to  different  workmen  who  are  scattered 
and  are  strangers  to  one  another ;  none  of  them  knowing  the  work  as  a 
whole,  or  the  definitive  and  general  result  to  which  it  concurs,  yet  each 
executing  with  intelligence  and  liberty  by  rational  and  voluntary  acts, 
that  of  which  he  has  the  charge.  So  is  the  plan  of  Providence  upon  the 
world  executed  by  the  hand  of  mankind,”  &c.  “  Dieu  fait  present  h 

I’homme  d’une  image  de  la  Divinite  en  lui  donnant  ^intelligence.  II  le 
laisse  faire  en  quelque  fagon  dans  son  petit  departement ;  c’est  la  ou  le 
franc  arbitre  joue  son  jeu  ;  Phomme  y  est  comme  un  petit  Dieu  dans  son 
propre  monde.” — Leibnitz,  Works ,  p.  548.  Hence  the  scholastic  distinc¬ 
tions  of  the  antecedent  and  consequent  Will  of  God,  of  Secondary 
Councils,  and  of  the  First  and  Second  Law  Eternal.  See  Hooker,  Eccl. 
Pol.,  I.  iii. 


IOO 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


permissive.1  For,  under  whatever  theory  of 
the  freedom  of  the  will,  the  original  grant  of 
such  freedom  must  he  assumed  in  the  same 
manner  as  the  primary  underived  properties  of 
matter.2 

The  action  §  15.  But  if  such  he  the  testimony  of  reason  to 

will  con-  the  existence  of  will  in  man,  what  is  the  stumbling- 
block  on  the  side  of  experience  to  its  reception  ? 
Not  the  assumption  that  its  choice  is  unconditioned, 
for  no  such  assumption  is  made.  The  will  may  act 
under  fixed  laws  of  choice,  or,  as  it  has  been 
happily  expressed,  “  by  confluence  with  the  laws  of 
nature  ”  determining  in  ordinary  cases  an  uniform 
result,  and  yet  may  be  free  to  choose.3  The  part 
ultimately  adopted  in  action,  without  being  an 
instance  of  causeless  or  indifferent  spontaneity,  may 
be  contrary  to  all  expectation,  and  yet  there  may 
have  been  ground  for  expectation.  The  possession 

1  “  Nec  tamen  ita  liberum  arbitrium  animas  datum  est,  ut  quodlibet  eo 
moliens,  ullam  partem  Divini  ordinis  legisque  perturbet.” — Augustine, 
De  Quant.  Anim .,  c.  xxxvi. 

2  “  L’ame  a  en  elle  le  principe  de  toutes  ses  actions  et  mSme  de  toutes 
ses  passions :  le  meme  est  vrai  dans  toutes  les  substances  simples 
repandues  par  toute  la  nature.” — Leibnitz,  Works ,  p.  526. 

3  This  is  the  erreur-mere  of  the  paradox  of  Hobbes,  that  deliberation 
does  not  exclude  necessity,  for  the  choice  itself  is  a  necessary  one. 
“  A  finite  will  constitutes  a  true  beginning ;  but  with  regard  to  the 
series  of  motives  and  changes  by  which  the  free  act  is  manifested  and 
made  effectual,  the  finite  will  gives  a  beginning  only  by  coincidence 
with  that  absolute  will  which  is  at  the  same  time  Infinite  Power.” 
— Coleridge,  A.  It.,  p.  204.  See  also  Dean  Mansel,  Aids  to  Faith , 
pp.  19,  20.  Sir  W.  Hamilton  writes,  “  A  motiveless  volition  is  only 
casualism  ;  and  the  free  acts  of  an  indifferent  are  morally  and  rationally 
as  worthless  as  the  pre-ordered  passions  of  a  determined  will.” 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


IOI 


of  will  does  not  necessitate  irregularity  of  conduct, 

even  if  considered  absolutely  free.  A  die  often 

conies  up  several  times  running,  though  this  does 

not  leave  the  chances  of  the  next  throw  other  than 

even.  Still  less,  if  it  he  considered  to  any  extent  yet  ex¬ 
hibiting  an 

limited  by  laws.  Yet,  in  most  men,  we  find  ultimate  , 

.  indepen- 

“  occasional  revolutionary  moments,  “  a  turn  of  dence. 
the  tide  in  mind  and  character,”  a  power  of  break¬ 
ing  loose  from  the  continuity  of  habit,  which 
in  theology  has  received  the  name  of  an  Effectual 
Call.1  The  profligate  man  ( eiecov  6l4kovti  ye  Ov/jlco^ 
may,  all  at  once,  cast  his  slough  of  immorality ; 
the  irresolute  renounce  his  hesitancy,  the  virtuous 
all  his  old  propriety  of  choice.  Such  conduct,  and 
it  is  by  no  means  unfrequent,  may  admit,  when 
examined,  of  a  so-called  natural  explanation.  Men 
are  always  guided,  it  is  said,  by  the  strongest 
motive.  Well,  but  what  is  strength  when  we  apply  Our  igno- 
the  laws,  or  even  the  analogies,  of  matter  to  that  the  nature 
which  is,  in  its  nature,  spiritual  ? 2  It  may  be  thus  °  motlves 

1  Coleridge,  u.  s .,  p.  40.  It  cannot  be  denied  that  we  have  the  power 
of  contributing  indirectly  at  least  to  frame  our  will  at  any  future  time. 

“  On  se  pent  chercher  de  nouvelles  raisons  et  se  donner  avec  le  temps  de 
nouvelles  dispositions  ;  et  par  ce  moyen  on  se  pent  encore  procurer  une 
volonte  qu’on  n’avoit  pas,  et  qu’on  ne  pouvoit  pas  se  donner  sur-le- 
champ.  Leibnitz,  p.  631.  This  fact  is  also  relied  on  by  Kant  in  his 
Metaphysics  of  Ethics. 

2  What  right  have  we  to  presume  that  motives  act  on  the  mind,  as 
bodies  upon  bodies  ?  “  Every  system,”  says  Mr.  Hutton,  Essays ,  I.  87, 

“  but  distorts  and  caricatures  the  moral  nature  of  man  which  takes  the 
analogies  of  material  science  into  the  region  of  the  spiritual  life.”  See 
the  whole  question  as  discussed  by  Dean  Mansel,  Prolegg .,  p.  302  ;  and 
Mr.  Mill,  Exam,,  p.  518,  who  explains  it  as  the  motive  strongest  in 


Fatalism 
opposite 
to  con¬ 
sciousness 


Objection 
to  man’s 
freedom 
of  action 
drawn 
from  the 
univer¬ 
sality  of 
laws  of 
Nature. 


102  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  II. 

liable  to  explanation,  or  it  may  not .  If  it  be,  it 
will  be  found  to  involve  the  same  assumption  of 
moral  consciousness  which,  whether  original  or 
derived,  the  result  of  organism,  inheritance,  custom, 
or  association,  makes  part  of  the  furniture  of  our 
being.  Nor  is  it  possible  to  believe  the  whole 
human  race  to  be,  and  to  have  always  been,  in  error 
upon  such  a  matter.  Oar  senses,  it  is  true,  some¬ 
times  deceive  us,1  and  there  may  be  such  a  thing  as 
colour-blindness  in  moral  perceptions.  Yet  we 
habitually  follow  their  impressions.  Fatalism,  the 
antithesis  of  voluntariness,  has  ever  been  the  off- 
’  spring  of  dogma,  whether  in  philosophy  or  religion. 
It  is  the  resort  of  dialectical  difficulties,  not  of 
hearty  natural  suggestion.  It  has  never  yet 
proved  itself  the  outcome  of  unmixed  human 
consciousness. 

§  1 6.  There  is,  however,  undoubtedly,  a  grow¬ 
ing  tendency  to  confound  law  with  causation ;  and, 
by  consequence,  physical  laws  with  moral  causation. 
A  law,  considered  as  an  agent,  is  “  like  an  idol, 
nothing  in  the  world.”2  Yet,  while  admitted  to  be 

relation  to  pain  or  pleasure.  But,  though  these  be,  as  Locke  calls  them, 
“  the  hinges  on  which  our  actions  turn,”  we  know  nothing  as  to  their 
acting  directly  on  the  will. 

1  A  topic  which  has  accordingly  formed  the  constant  stock-in-trade 
of  scepticism.  Cf.  Montaigne,  Essais,  II.  c.  xii. ;  Pascal,  Pensees ,  II.  47. 
But  in  the  end  it  is  sufficiently  apparent  that  we  have  ourselves  to  blame, 
having  through  haste  and  inconsideration  misread  the  testimony  of  the 
senses.  Compare  Bacon,  Works,  III.  388,  ed.  Spedding. 

2  See  some  good  remarks  on  this  subject  by  Dr.  Bigg  in  his  Lecture 
on  Pantheism,  pp.  14,  31 ;  and  by  the  Duke  of  Argyll,  Reign  of  Law , 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


103 


only  a  mental  creation,  a  metaphysical  entity 
abhorred  of  Positivism,  a  generalization  of  relations 
among  phenomena,  it  is  too  often  made  into  a  theory 
to  explain  their  mode  of  existence.  An  argument 
is  raised  from  the  universality  of  laws  of  causation 
in  Nature  to  the  case  of  human  action.  But  the  in  what 

respects 

major  premiss  rests  upon  a  simple  enumeration,  defective, 
which  is  incomplete  till  the  will  of  man  can  be 
shown  to  be  reducible  to  the  general  formula. 
Again,  the  generality  of  laws,  it  is  acknowledged, 
does  not  imply  their  necessity.  But  the  fact  of 
such  generality  existing  is  held  to  he  enough.1 
Hence,  if  statistics  prove  the  uniformity  of  human 
action,  the  question  of  a  will  in  man  is  thought 
practically  to  be  given  up.  But  the  law  here 
stands  not  only  for  what  is  ;  it  becomes  a  synonyme 
for  what  must  he.  It  is  no  longer  a  mode  only  of 
expressing  facts  ;  it  assumes  a  necessity  of  operation. 

p.  230.  “  Ainsi,”  writes  De  Maistre  with  much  passion  and  fire,  “  nous 

laisserons  dire  les  sophistes  avec  leurs  Lois  eternelles  et  immudbles  qui 
n’existent  que  dans  leur  imagination  et  qui  ne  tendent  h  rien  moins  qu’a 
l’extinction  de  toute  moralite  et  h  rabrutissement  absolu  de  l’espece 
humain.” — Soirees ,  p.  175.  Leibnitz  (  Works,  pp.  542,  614,  &c.)  con¬ 
stantly  distinguishes  between  what  follows  naturally  and  what  follows 
necessarily.  Present  physicists  profess  themselves  satisfied  with  the 
former,  and  thus  do  away  with  the  office  of  metaphysics.  It  may  some 
day  appear  as  unreasonable  to  deny  human  liberty  on  physical  grounds, 
as  it  would  now  seem  to  found,  like  Epicurus,  man’s  freedom  in  acting 
on  the  original  declination  of  atoms.  Cf.  Lucret.,  II.  251. 

1  See  Mill,  Examination ,  p.  150.  “  A  volition  is  a  moral  effect  which 
follows  the  corresponding  moral  causes  as  certainly  and  invariably  as 
physical  effects  follow  their  physical  causes.  Whether  it  must  do  so,  1 
acknowledge  myself  to  be  entirely  ignorant ;  ...  all  I  know  is  that  it 
always  does.” 


104 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


Man  becomes  lost  in  the  race ;  the  individual  in  the 
species.1 

Tho’  thou  wert  scattered  to  the  wind, 

Yet  is  there  plenty  of  the  kind. 

Thus,  Law  is  made  a  Juggernaut  riding  forth 
and  demanding  victims  on  his  way.  But  it  may 
be  said, — Does  it  not  always  find  them  ?  Granted  : 
I  mean  the  uniformity  of  the  facts  which  it  regu- 
of°uni-S1°n  ^es>  But  thus  explained  why  this  one  or 
whhne  tliat  sk°uM  be  the  victims?  This  depends,  it  is 
cessity  of  replied,  on  special  laws  as  distinct  from  general, 

operation.  ...  ° 

with  which  we  are  not  at  present  acquainted.2 
But  why,  we  answer,  should  necessity  of  action 

1  Justin  Martyr,  Dial.  c.  Tryph .,  c.  i.,  notices  this  view  as  current  in 
the  philosophy  of  the  time,  aWa  Kal  rjpas  eViyeipovoT.  rreideLv  <us  rod 
p.€V  crvpTvavTos  Kal  avr&v  rcov  yevwv  Kal  eiSco v  eTTipeXeiraL  0eoy,  ipov 
Kal  crov  ovk  en  Kal  rod  Ka6'  eKaara. 

So  careful  of  the  type  she  seems, 

So  careless  of  the  single  life. 

Feuerbach,  Essence  of  Christianity ,  p.  150,  E.  T.,  catches  this  vital 
difference  in  Christian  teaching.  “  Christianity  cared  nothing  for  the 
species,  and  had  only  the  individual  in  its  eye  and  mind.”  Compare 
Prof.  Huxley,  Lay  Sermons ,  p.  158.  Epicurus  himself  struggled  hard 
against  the  doctrine  of  a  physical  necessity.  Cf.  ap.  Diog.  Laert.  x. 
133,  134,  eWi  KpIiTTOv  rjv  TCO  7rept  Qecou  pv6w  KaraKoXovOelv  rj  rfj  tg>u 
(f)v<jLKcov  eipappevj]  dovXeveiv  6  pev  yap  e\7 ri8a  napaLTrjo'eoos  V7roypa(pei 
Oewu  §ta  TLprjs ,  rj  Se  anapaLTTjTOv  eyei  rrjv  avayKrjv. 

2  “  In  a  given  state  of  society,  a  certain  number  of  persons  must  put 
an  end  to  their  own  life.  This  is  the  general  law;  and  the  special 
question  as  to  who  shall  commit  the  crime  depends  of  course  upon 
special  laws ;  which,  however,  in  their  total  action,  must  obey  the  large 
social  law  to  which  they  are  all  subordinate.” — Buckle,  H.  C .,  I.  28. 
Mansel  well  points  out  that  the  uniformity  represented  by  statistical 
averages  is  one  which  is  observed  in  masses  only,  and  not  in  individuals  ; 
and  hence  the  law,  if  law  it  be,  indicated  is  one  which  offers  no  bar  to 
the  existence  of  individual  freedom  exercised,  like  all  human  power, 
within  limits. 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


105 


(and  a  latent  necessity  is  certainly  assumed)  be 
any  more  admissible  in  respect  of  special  tban  of 
general  laws  ?  No  man  when  he  has  apprehended 
the  conditions  of  his  being  thinks  of  contravening 
them.  He  feels  that  laws,  as  Butler  long  ago 
pointed  out,  imply  penalties  appointed  by  the 
Author  of  Nature  for  the  well-being  of  mankind.  Apparent 

design  of 

He  turns  them,  then,  to  His  own  purposes  through  natural 

~  L  .  uniformity. 

the  very  circumstance  of  their  fixedness  without, 
however,  losing  the  conviction  that  he  is  himself 
responsible  for  what  he  does.  But  responsibility 
is  incompatible  with  constraint.  The  facts,  then, 
seem  to  be  these.  A  large  proportion  of  mankind, 
submitted  to  certain  tests,  will  act  in  a  given  way 
and  in  the  same  way.  But  all  do  not.1  And, 
what  is  more,  in  acting  they  are  conscious  that 
they  might,  and  in  particular  cases  ought,  to  act 
differently.  This  consciousness  is  itself  a  fact  as 
patent  as  the  uniformities  of  statistical  averages, 
and  points  to  something  further,  i.  e.  to  freedom  in 
acting.  These,  as  facts,  must  first  be  admitted  on 
positive  grounds  and  then  be  scientifically  ex- 

1  ’Tis  one  thing  to  be  tempted,  Escalus  ; 

Another  thing  to  fall. — Measure  for  Measure ,  act  ii.  sc.  1. 

Inclination,  that  is,  is  not  constraint :  it  rather  implies  freedom.  See 
Harless,  System  of  Christian  Ethics ,  pp.  20,  85,  E.  T. ;  Delitzsch,  Bib. 

Psych.,  p.  194.  “Man,”  said  Luther  (Comm,  on  Gal.),  “is  not  two 
beings  opposed  to  each  other,  but  is  like  the  dawn  of  the  morning, 
which  is  neither  night  nor  day.”  This  is  the  answer  to  the  dilemma, 
that  motives  must  either  determine  a  man  to  act,  or  influence  him  to 
determine  himself  to  act.  See  Hamilton’s  Reid,  p.  608. 


io  6 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


plained.1  If  subordinated  to  physical  laws  and 
method,  they  are  not  thereby  rendered  inconsistent 
Objection  with  every  form  of  Christian  theology.2  But  it  is 

based  on  1  l  •  °*/ 

the  nature  no  such  explanation  to  reply  that  consciousness  is 

of  con-  c  ,  ,  . 

sciousness.  do  faculty,  only  a  state  or  condition  of  mind,  liable 
to  occasional  error  ;3  occasional,  indeed,  for  if  it  be 
held  a  permanent  delusion,  the  whole  human  race 
must  needs  have  lain  in  darkness  until  now.  Yet 
why,  it  has  been  justly  asked,4  are  we  now  to  un¬ 
clothe  our  minds  of  that  large  outfit  of  existing 
thoughts,  desires,  hopes,  and  fears,  which  make  us 
(and  have  made  us)  what  we  are  ?  Neither, 
again,  can  we  admit  the  fact  of  this  inward  testi¬ 
mony  of  a  soul,  naturally  Christian,  without  ac¬ 
knowledging  further  its  cogency  and  truth.  It 

ne°ssSan°a-S*  woulcl  as  easY  else  to  disprove  on  the  same 
p°egrcep-t0  £rounds  the  existence  of  an  external  world,  of  the 
tion.  whole  fabric  of  Nature,  and  of  those  very  laws  the 
extent  of  which  is  the  real  and  sole  object  of  con¬ 
tention.  Even  if  an  act  of  consciousness  involve 
an  opeiation  of  inference,  it  is  one  of  the  same 

There  are  some  good  remarks  on  Buckle’s  interpretation  (I.  38)  of 
the  views  of  Kant  upon  Free  Will,  in  Lange,  Gesch.  des  Mater ialismus, 
pp.  478-81. 

2  Compare  Huxley  in  his  essay  on  Descartes,  Lay  S.t  pp.  374,  375. 

3  Buckle  ( u .  s.,  I.  15),  who  is  really  following  the  guidance  of  Bayle 
in  his  strictures  on  the  Cartesian  doctrine.  Leibnitz,  though  unwilling  to 
rest  man’s  independence  on  a  sentiment,  justly  claims  it  as  the  result  of 
a  minute  investigation  of  the  elements  of  consciousness.  Non  enim  et 
sentire  intelligere  est,  et  intelligere  sentire  est  ?  asks  Ter tullian  (Amm,, 
c.  xviii.). 

4  J.  II.  Newman,  Grammar  of  Assent,  p.  419. 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


107 


kind  with  perception,  and  do  further  liable  than  it 
to  disproof  or  mistrust. 

§  17.  Nor,  lastly,  is  this  view  of  free  agency,  A  ^ondP 
that  in  the  practical  exercise  of  it  we  are  always  no  barren 

1  '  '  proposi- 

guided  by  motives,  consciously  or  unconsciously,  tion. 
which  yet  do  not  necessitate  conduct,  “a  barren 
proposition,”  incapable  of  translation  into  action.1 
To  regulate  the  conditions  of  society  in  the  most 
favourable  manner ;  to  teach  that  the  individual  is 
no  mere  slave  of  circumstances ;  that  the  knowledge 
of  the  risks  of  temptation  entails  the  duty  of  keep¬ 
ing  clear  of  unwholesome  tendencies  to  action  and 
of  bearing  ourselves  firmly  and  manfully  when  Its  resuIt' 

o  *>  47  mg  respon- 

submitted  to  them,  thus  “  redeeming  the  time  be-  sibiiities. 
cause  the  days  are  evil,”  this  is  a  task  worthy  alike 
of  the  statesman  and  the  philanthropist,  and  is  the 
proper  duty  of  the  clergyman,  the  tutor,  and  the 
schoolmaster.  A  barren  proposition  !  Then  let  Moral  re- 

.A  ±  '  suits  of  the 

Religion  indeed  cease  her  office  and  the  faith  ofMaterki- 

0  #  istic  or 

Christ  its  professions.  What  need  of  exhortation  Positivist 

view 

where  there  is  no  choice  ? 2  Or  of  atonement  where 
there  can  be  no  sin  ?  Or  of  promises  which  have 

1  “  If  any  one  says  that  we  have  this  power  of  acting  without  motives, 
but  that  in  the  practical  exercise  of  the  power  we  are  always  guided  by 
motives,  either  conscious  or  unconscious  —  if  any  one  says  this,  he 
asserts  a  barren  proposition.” — Buckle,  I.  18,  n.  Holy  Scripture,  while 
it  nowhere  speaks  of  man  as  free,  says  everywhere  that  he  can  choose 
(Cf.  Is.  vii.  15)  ;  thus  making  self-determination  the  property  of  human 
nature.  See  Delitzsch,  Bill.  Psych .,  p.  192. 

2  It  may,  perhaps,  be  contended  that  in  practice  the  morality  of 
necessity  does  not  enfeeble  the  claims  of  duty,  because  the  Predestinarian 
schools  have  always  been  rigorists.  This  may  be  explained  to  some 


io  8 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  II. 


no  real  hold  in  the  heart  or  soul  of  man  ?  What 
need  to  discuss  the  permanence  of  a  belief  which 
can  be  the  fruit  but  of  hypocrisy  or  ignorance  ? 
But  what,  on  the  other  hand,  is  to  he  thought  of 
a  philosophy,  the  boasted  result  of  science,  which, 
extinguishing  motive,1  abolishes  the  reasons  of 
action,  and  filches  together  with  these  the  very 
savour  of  human  existence ;  which  annihilates  duty, 
makes  benevolence  impossible,  the  enthusiasm  of 
humanity  absurd  *  which  degrades  the  immortal 
spirit,  the  “blessed  part”  of  man,  to  the  level  of 
1  rotean  matter  and  the  dominion  of  brute  forces  j2 

extent  by  prudential  considerations ;  but  hardly  by  any  logical  con¬ 
nection.  This  is  discussed  in  Meri vale’s  Conv.  of  N.  Nations* pp.  167- 

1  The  philosophical  error  of  Positivism  is  to  ignore  the  free  play  of 
individual  action  as  beneficial  to  human  progress.  Hence,  perhaps, 
Comte’s  well-known  aversion  to  Protestantism.  This  is,  indeed,  but 
one  form  of  his  disinclination  to  recognize  Causation  as  open  to  the 
reach  of  man’s  faculties.  The  result  is  undoubtedly  to  measure  all 
knowledge  by  the  Laws  of  Phenomena.  On  this  subject  the  reader  is 
refened  to  Mill  s  Logic ,  Book  III.,  v.  §  9,  and  on  the  materialistic  ten¬ 
dencies  of  Positivism  to  Mr.  Lecky,  Hist.  Rationalism,  II.  p.  408 
together  with  Mill,  A.  Comte  and  Positiv.,  p.  15,  &c.  It  is,  indeed’ 
denied  by  M.  Littre,  Princiyes ,  pp.  38,  39. 

Positivism,  allowing  spirit  no  place  in  its  system,  denies  im¬ 
mortality  to  man,  but  confers  it  on  humanity.”— Mr.  A.  Fairbairn  on 
Belief  in  Immortality  ( Cant .  Rev.,  XX.  28).  Compare  Mill,  Comte  and 
Pos.,  pp.  135,  152.  Prof.  Huxley,  Lay  S.,  p.  191,  quotes  a  beautiful 
but  melancholy  passage  from  M.  Comte,  attesting  the  unsatisfactory 
results  of  so  baseless  a  fabric  of  belief  as  that  of  Positivism.  “  La 
philosophic  est  une  tentative  incessante  de  l’esprit  humain  pour  arriver  au 
repos.  Mais  elle  se  trouve  incessamment  aussi  derangee  par  les  promes 
contmus  de  la  science.  De  la  vient  pour  le  philosophe  l’obligation  de 
refaire  chaque  soir  la  synthdse  de  ses  conceptions;  et  un  jour  viendra 
ou  i’homme  raisonnable  ne  fera  plus  d’autre  prifcre  du  soir.” 


Lect.  II.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


109 


which  consecrates  selfishness  by  enthroning  it  in 
the  struggle  for  existence  above  wisdom  and  virtue  ; 
and  which  views,  alike  unmoved  and  powerless  of 
consolation,  the  agonies  of  remorse,  the  isolation  of 
bereavement,  and  the  yearnings  of  the  saint  after 
communion  with  Divine  holiness  ?  Only  if  free  to 
choose,  is  man  capable  of  duty  in  any  sense  of  the  j^ces^ry 
word  which  is  not  simply  nominal  but  worth  practical 

A  ^  m  religion. 

retaining.  But,  if  capable  of  duty,  he  is  capable 
of  religion.  He  is  still,  though  conscious  of  sin, 
nobler  than  the  tame  creatures  of  a  dull  uniformity, 
the  ready  vassals  of  a  law  they  can  never  break. 

In  those  unreasoning  creatures,  devoid  of  abstrac¬ 
tion,  idealization,  reflection,  yet  from  which  it  is 
now  the  fashion  to  derive  all  the  properties  of  man, 
the  will  is  absorbed  in  the  law.1  “  The  law  is  their 
nature.”  In  the  original  purity  of  a  rational  being, 
the  uncorrupted  will  is  one  with  the  law  of  his 
nature.  And  so  it  will  be  hereafter. 

Mind,  and  soul  according  well, 

Shall  make  one  music  as  before, 

But  vaster. 

If  man,  it  has  been  finely  said,  4 4  be  no  higher  in  ^GarntQUt^‘ 
his  destinies  than  the  beast  or  the  blade  of  grass,  it  ^sir£alsJn 
might  be  better  to  be  a  beast  or  a  blade  of  grass  bility.and 

o  0  conscious¬ 

ness  of  sin. 

1  See  Coleridge,  A.  i?.,  p.  233.  The  fine  lines  of  Juvenal  will  he 
readily  remembered : — 

Principio  indulsit  communis  Conditor  illis 
Tantum  animas,  nobis  animum  quoque,  &c. 


I  10 


OBJECTIONS,  &c.  [Lect.  II. 

than  a  man.”1  But  it  is  not  so,  brethren.  The 
stork  in  the  heavens  may  know  her  appointed 
times ;  the  turtle,  the  crane,  and  the  swallow  may 
observe  the  time  of  their  coming ;  and  when  they 
wing  their  flight  may  leave  without  remorse  their 
unfledged  young  to  die.2  They  run  their  allotted 
course.  But  man,  even  though  he  perish,  though 
sin  becomes  the  law  of  his  nature,  and  evil  clings 
about  him  like  a  robe,  is  great  in  the  ruin  of  his 
fall.  He  knows  why  he  perishes,3  and  worships,  in 
the  bitterness  of  his  soul,  the  purity,  the  nobleness, 
the  love  which  he  has  forfeited  for  himself  for  ever. 

1  Prof.  Gold  win  Smith,  Lectures  on  the  Study  of  History,  p.  12. 

2  See  Mr.  Darwin,  Descent  of  Man. 

3  “  Quando  autem  melior  homo  et  pecoribus  prasponendus  ?  Qnando 
novit  quod  tacit.”— August,  de  Ord .,  II.  xix. ;  and  again,  Civ.  D.,  xxii. : 

Sicut  CeBcitas  oculi  vitium  est,  et  idem  ipsum  indicat  ad  lumen  videndum 
oculum  esse  creatum,  ac  per  hoc  etiam  ipso  vitio  suo  excellentius  ostendit 
ut  caeteris  membris  membrum  capax  luminis  (non  enim  alia  causa  esset 
vitium  ejus  caiere  lumino)  :  ita  natura  qua?  fruebatur  Deo,  optimam  se 
institutam  docet  etiam  ipso  vitio,  quo  ideo  misera  est,  quia  non  fruitur 
Deo.”  Compare  Chateaubriand,  Genie  da  Christ.,  I.  208.  “Pourquoi  le 
boeuf  ne  fait-il  pas,”  &c.  Strauss,  Leben  Jesu ,  II.  697,  admits  that 
while  animals  are  but  races,  men  have  the  knowledge  that  they  are  a 
race.  Hence  arises  the  possibility  of  history  with  all  its  consequences. 
Cf.  Dorner,  Hist.  Trot.  Th.,  11.  370. 


LECTURE  III. 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

CONSIDERED. 


Ka0oXov,  4>r)fxi,  dvo  ndarjs  yeveaeoos  alrias  e’xovo^y,  a'L  ^ v  acfrodpa 
nciXcuol  OeoXoyoi  Kai  noit)Ta\  rrj  KpeiTTOvi  povr)  tov  vovv  npoae^eiv  eiAovro, 
tovto  dr)  to  kolvov  intffiOeyyopevoi  nacri  7 rpaypaai. 

Zevs  dp^rj,  Zevs  peacra,  Aios  d  e<  7 ravTa  neXovTai. 

Tai9  S’  dvayKaicus  Kai  (fivcriiccus  ovk  eri  npoarjenav  aiTiais.  0 t  de 
Ved>T€pOL  TOVTOiV  Kai  (f)V(TlKoi  npOCTayop€VOp€VOl  TOVVaVTLOV  CKCIVOIS  T1)S 
KaXr/s  Kai  Seias  an onkavr) devres  dp^ijs ,  lv  crApaa 1  Kai  naOeai  acoparcov, 
n\r)yals  re  Kai  peTa(3o\ais  Kai  Kpaaecri  TiOevrai  to  avpnav.  PLUTARCH, 
Defect.  Orac.,  c.  xlviii. 


f 


LECTURE  III. 


“  Wherefore  should  they  say  among  the  people , —  Where  is  their  God?” — 

3focI  it.  17. 

§  1.  T  T  would  be  but  futile  to  build  any  arori-  Tlie  truth 
ment  upon  the  past  or  the  future  of  the  Provi- 
Faith  of  Christ,  were  the  fundamental  truth  denied  sential  to 
of  the  controlling  Providence  of  Gfod.  As  religion  Ind  per? 
itself  is  a  thing  not  worth  contending  for,  when  religion.0 °f 
free-will  in  man  is  given  up,  so  Christianity,  devoid 
of  a  special  and  personal  relation  to  the  Almighty 
in  His  work  of  grace  (which  may  be  said  to  be  in 
respect  of  all  Pagan  religions  its  cardinal  and 
characteristic  doctrine),  is  a  shadow  without  sub¬ 
stance.1  It  becomes,  then,  of  the  first  importance 
to  inquire  on  what  grounds  the  belief  in  a  special 
Providence  is  held  to  be  in  course  of  being:  sur- 

1  “  Si  Dei  Providentia  non  praesidet  rebus  humanis,  nihil  est  de  reli- 
gione  satagendum”— August.,  Util  Cred.,  cxvi.  “Deum  nisi  et  esse  et 
hutfianis  mentibus  opitulari  credimus,  nec  quaBrere  quidem  ipsam  verara 
religionem  debemus.” — lb.,  c.  xiii.  Comp.  Lactant.,  Instit.  Div.,  VII. 
c.  vi.  See  Waterland,  Discourse  of  Fundamentals  ( Works,  V.  80). 

“  Tlie  theory  of  Providence,”  writes  Mr.  Hutton,  Fssays,  I.  88,  “  is  one 
which,  unless  harmonized  with  general  moral  and  physical  laws,  can 
assuredly  stand  no  longer;  and  yet  it  is  one  which  has  exerted  so  pro¬ 
found  an  influence  over  every  Christian  mind  from  the  earliest  Christian 
ages  to  our  own,  that  to  part  with  it  would  be  to  give  up  the  very  life 
of  religion.”  “  1  Point  de  religion  sans  priere’a  dit  cc  meme  Voltaire. 

Pien  de  plus  evident;  et  par  une  consequence  neccssaire,  point  de  priero, 
point  de  religion.” — De  Maistre,  Soirees,  p.  158. 


I 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  III. 


1 14 


rendered ;  how  this  incredulity  has  arisen,  whether 
it  is  a  necessary  consequence  of  the  existing  state 
of  knowledge,  a  permanent  menace  to  the  progress 

Present  0f  Christ’s  religion.  That  rude  assaults  are  being 

assaults  on  0 

this  belief,  made  on  this  cardinal  tenet  of  the  faith  can  no 
longer  he  doubted.  M.  Comte 1  treats  the  doctrine 
of  even  a  general  Providence  as  an  antique  destiny 
under  a  new  dress,  as  a  metaphysical  artifice,  a 
provisional  conception,  a  concession  or  compromise 
made  to  the  theological  spirit.  “  The  future  of 
the  world,”  writes  a  living  Positivist,2  “  will  justify 
the  faith  that  man  can  be  a  providence  to  himself 
in  a  more  practical  and  beneficial  sense  than  any 
of  the  various  providences  he  created  in  his  earlier 
existence.”  “  Science,”  says  another,  “  is  the  true 
providence  of  man.  We  lay  no  faith  on  a  personal 
Grod,  we  use  our  own  faculties.”  Such  dicta ,  at 
least,  suffice  to  mark  the  present  stand-point  of 
opinion  and  feeling  in  certain  quarters  in  regard 
to  this  fundamental  postulate  of  all  practical 
religion. 


1  “  La  Providence  des  Monotheistes  n’est  reellement  autre  chose  que  le 
destin  des  Polytheistes.” — Phil.  Pos.,  V.  280.  Elsewhere  he  argues  that 
were  the  conceptions  of  theology  true,  prayer  would  be  the  proper  means 
of  human  progress,  lb.,  IV.  695,  700.  On  the  views  of  the  so-called 
“  Secularists,”  cf.  Dr.  Farrar,  Ramp.  Led.,  p.  441. 

2  Dr.  Congreve,  Troy,  of  New  Religion,  ad  fin.  “  Quisquis  sibi 
Deus  ”  is  a  maxim  in  the  philosophy  of  Stirner.  “  Du  moment  qu’on 
ne  laisse  aucune  place  aux  volontes  surnaturelles,  ni  dans  le  monde 
inorganique,  ni  dans  le  monde  organique,  ni  parmi  les  phenomenes 
cosmiques,  ni  parmi  ceux  de  l’histoire,  on  est  necessairement  des  notres.” 
— Littre,  Paroles  de  Philosophic  Positive,  p.  58. 


Lect.  HI.]  PROGRESS  OP  CHRISTIANITY.  115 

§  2 .  The  Epicureanism  of  the  age,  not  specula-  Rise  of 
tive,  not  anticipatory,  but  positive  and  evidential,  opinions 
is  the  product,  doubtless,  of  a  vast  and  rapid 
advance  in  physical  knowledge,  which,  commenc-  abiiityTnd 
ing  with  the  sixteenth  century,  has  culminated  in  sdily  of 
our  own.1  It  has,  in  a  manner,  carried  all  before  nalurf 
it.  It  lias  reacted  on  the  older  metaphysical 
modes  of  thought.  It  has  produced  a  twofold 
effect.  First,  the  conviction  of  the  invariability  of 
laws  of  nature  has  been  indefinitely  strengthened 
by  each  freshly-observed  uniformity,  and  explana¬ 
tion  of  related  phenomena.  Next,  the  suspicion  of 
the  universality  of  the  reign  of  law  is  heightened 
by  each  new  discovery  in  distinct  departments  of 
science,  and  a  method  of  Comparative  Physics,  now 
fiist  rendered  possible,  is  continually  furthering 
this  impression.  It  is  thus  deemed  the  central 
element  of  intellectual  progress.  The  relation  of 
laws  of  nature  to  general  laws  soon  comes  into 
question.2  Now,  though  law  can  never  be  justly 
held,  in  any  true  sense,  a  medium  between  God 
and  His  works,  yet  it  may,  and  constantly  does, 
arrest  the  attention  of  the  creature.  This  stopping  Joined 

1  «  T  r  1  •  T  -1  .  “  b  with  an 

daclis  la  raison  humaine  le  voyant  sujet  au  changement  alia  cher-  imperfect 

cher  l’eternel,  l’immuable  par  dela  l’horizon  et  dans  les  archetypes,  explana- 

Maintenant  l’eternel,  rimmuable  devenant  notion  positive,  nous  ap-  th°em°f 

parait  sous  la  forme  des  lois  immanentes  qui  gouvernent  tout.” — Littre,  em* 

Principes  de  Phil .  Pos.,  p.  57. 

See  Mozley,  Bamp.  Led.,  p.  156  :  “  The  only  intelligible  meaning 
which  we  can  assign  to  general  laws  is,  that  they  are  the  laws  of  nature, 
with  the  addition  of  a  particular  theory  of  the  Divine  mode  of  conduct¬ 
ing  them ;  the  theory,  viz.  of  secondary  causes.” 

i  2 


ii  6 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  III. 


short  in  the  process  of  analyzing  nature  may 
eventuate  in  different  directions,  in  Naturalism,  in 
Materialism,  in  Pantheism,  in  virtual  Atheism.1 
For,  if  the  present  control  of  Divine  agency  be 
disallowed,  what  remains  but  a  practical  negation 
of  belief,  or  total  incredulity  ? 

Physical  5  o  It  is  not,  of  course,  intended  to  imply  that 

studies  not  ^  J  . 

irreligious,  physical  studies  are  in  themselves  atheistic  or 
irreligious.  The  reverse  would  be  nearer  the 
truth.  JReligio  ascensio  mentis  in  Deum  per  scalas 
cr  eat  arum  rerum  should  still  be  the  proud  motto  of 
Natural  Science.2  There  is  no  proper  reason  why 
supernaturalism  should  not  do  full  justice  to 
nature  ;  none  why  nature  should  not  do  justice  to 
supernaturalism.3  Too  much,  indeed,  of  what  has 

1  On  the  history  of  the  term  Naturalism,  and  its  relation  to  a  system 
of  Rationalism,  see  H.  J.  Rose,  on  State  of  Protestantism  in  Germany , 
pp.  19-23.  Wegscheider  (Inst.  Theol.,  p.  32)  holds  it  to  consist  in  de¬ 
riving  all  effects  in  nature  from  a  necessity,  as  it  were,  of  nature  alone 
without  regard  to  Divine  Providence,  rejecting,  therefore,  all  efficacy  of 
God  in  imparting  religious  knowledge  to  men,  together  with  Revelation 
of  all  kinds.  Dr.  Farrar,  in  his  truly  learned  lectures  on  the  Critical 
Hist,  of  Free  Thought ,  pp.  478,  587,  notices  the  twofold  employment  of 
the  term,  and  remarks  that  Positivism  only  differs  from  Naturalism  in 
expressing  a  particular  theory  concerning  the  limits  and  method  of 
science,  as  well  as  a  disbelief  in  the  supernatural. 

2  Compare  Bacon,  Works ,  III.  357,  ed.  Spedding.  The  dangers  of 
exclusive  physical  study  are  pointed  out  by  Sir  W.  Hamilton  in  his 
Lectures ,  I.  p.  35  ff. 

3  Nature,  the  world  of  phenomena,  being  itself  a  totality  of  effects, 
can  determine  nothing  as  to  ulterior  causes.  Yet,  as  Mr.  Hutton  has 
finely  observed,  “  Men  are  haunted  with  the  phantom  of  a  power  they 
dare  not  challenge,  which  is  rumoured  to  have  superseded  and  exposed 
natural  theology,  and  to  bo  gradually  withdrawing  every  fold  of  mystery 
from  the  universe  without  disclosing  any  trace  of  God.,! — Essays ,  I.  45. 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  u 7 

been  termed  Agnosticism  or  Nescience,  and  by  its 
detractors  Antitheism,  has  been  developed  among 
leading  physicists  of  the  day.1  A  know-nothing 
system  of  philosophy  is  cheap  ware,  and  easily 
offered  for  acceptance.  It  can  hardly,  however, 
be  held  to  amount  to  a  denial  of  preternatural 
facts,  and  by  inference  of  truths  of  Revelation. 
The  sphere  of  our  belief  may  well  be  more  ex¬ 
tensive  than  the  sphere  of  our  knowledge.  An 
honest  effort  is,  doubtless,  being  made  by  many 
minds  to  couple  with  the  operation  of  general  laws 
a  religious  sense  of  the  Divine  agency.  Passages 
in  older  and  unsuspected  writers  are  eagerly  seized 
which  seem  to  reconcile  remote  causation  with  the 
Being  and  Providence  of  God.2  This  is  not,  of 
course,  the  whole,  or  strictly  the  real  question. 
Doubtless  there  is  nothing  essentially  contradictory 
or  mutually  exclusive  in  the  notions  of  Natural 
law  and  Divine  superintendence.  So  Spinoza 
argued  that  Providence  is  best  elicited,  from  the 

1  Compare  Mr.  Hutton,  u.  s.,  p.  27 ;  and  Prof.  Tyndall,  Fragments 
of  Thought ,  pp.  93,  105,  442 ;  Huxley,  L.  S.,  p.  20 :  “  If  the  religion  of 
the  present  differs  from  that  of  the  past,  it  is  because  the  theology  of  the 
present  has  become  more  scientific  than  that  of  the  past,  because  it  has 
renounced  idols  of  wood  and  idols  of  stone  ;  but  begins  to  see  the  neces¬ 
sity  of  breaking  in  pieces  the  idols  built  up  of  books  and  traditions  and 
fine-spun  ecclesiastical  cobwebs,  and  of  cherishing  the  noblest  and  most 
human  of  man’s  emotions  by  worship,  ‘  for  the  most  part  of  the  silent 
sort,’  at  the  altar  of  the  Unknown  and  Unknowable.” 

2  See  Mr.  Lecky’s  remarks,  Ii.  Itat.,  I.  195,  on  the  advancing  rap¬ 
prochement  between  writers  of  the  evidential  school  and  the  supporters 
of  the  inviolability  of  natural  laws.  Compare  Whewell,  B.  Tr.y 
p.  312,  &c. 


Tempta¬ 
tions  to  a 
system  of 
nescience. 


Provi¬ 
dence  not 
incom¬ 
patible 
with 
fatalism. 


IIS 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  III. 


fact  of  an  eternal  and  changeless  order  of  Nature.1 
So,  if  the  ideas  of  individual  freedom  of  action  in 
man,  or  of  casual  irregularity  in  physical  events, 
be  gradually  thrust  out  from  the  cycle  of  tenable 
theorems  and  accepted  beliefs,  the  result,  however 
much  to  be  regretted,  might  not  he  inconsistent 
with  the  truth  of  a  Divine  Creator,  and,  in  a  modi¬ 
fied  sense,  of  a  Divine  Providence.2  It  might, 
indeed,  seem  strange  that  the  world  should  turn 
out  to  he  a  puppet-show,  devoid  of  real  life  or 
originality.  But  it  will  be  answered  that  we  are 
concerned  only  to  ascertain  the  truth  of  things, 
and  not  with  the  issues  involved  in  them.  We  are 


recalled,  then,  to  the  prior  question,  whether  it  be 
a  fact  that  the  realm  of  Law  is  co-extensive,  as  far 


A  prior 
question 
arises  as  to 
the  real 
nature  of 
physical 
laws, 
whether 
objective 
or  subjec¬ 
tive  only. 


as  appears,  with  the  universe  of  matter  and  of  mind . 
Is  Law  a  necessity,  or,  at  least,  an  invariable  accom¬ 
paniment  of  the  Divine  agency,  so  far  as  it  is 
known  to  us  ?  Is  it,  indeed,  a  constant  course  of 
procedure,  a  necessary  stage  in  an  unknown  order 

1  Prreterea  cceli  rationes  ordine  certo 
Et  varia  annorum  cernebant  tempora  verti : 

Nee  poterant  quibus  id  fieret  cognoscere  causis. 

Ergo  perfugium  sibi  habebant,  omnia  Divis 
Tradere  et  illorum  nutu  facere  omnia  flecti. 


Lucret.,  V.  1182. 

2  “  The  natural  generation  and  process  of  all  things  receiveth  order  of 
proceeding  from  the  settled  stability  of  Divine  understanding.  This 
appointeth  unto  them  their  kinds  of  working;  the  disposition,  whereof 
in  the  purity  of  God’s  own  knowledge  and  will,  is  rightly  termed  by  the 
name  of  Providence.  The  same  being  referred  unto  the  things  them- 
selves  here  disposed  by  it,  was  wont  by  the  ancient  to  be  called  natural 
destiny.” — Hooker,  E.  P.,  I.  iii.  4. 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


1 19 

of  the  universe  ?  Or  is  it,  on  the  other  hand, 
anything*  more  than  a  mode  of  human  thought,1 
(for  this  also  has  been  held  respecting  it),  analo¬ 
gous  to  Time  and  Space,  conditions  regulative  of 
all  perception  of  phenomena,  yet  in  a  manner  un¬ 
essential,  relative,  not  absolute,  the  elimination 
of  which  is  not  beyond  conception  ?  Is  law  more 
than  an  act  of  the  mind,2  a  description  of  its  state 
of  expectation  in  respect  of  any  event?  Is  it 
capable  of  manifestation  to  aught  but  the  spirit  and 
intelligence  of  man  ?  Can  the  order  of  the  material 
universe  be  shown  to  be  other  than  the  comple¬ 
ment  of  the  human  understanding  ?  Does  not  the  - 

1  “  Long,  indeed,  will  man  strive  to  satisfy  the  inward  querist  with 

the  phrase,  Laws  of  Nature.  But  though  the  individual  may  rest  con¬ 
tent  with  the  seemly  metaphor,  the  race  cannot.” — Coleridge,  Friend , 
HI-  199-  “  Thought,  involving  simply  the  establishment  of  relations , 

may  be  readily  conceived  to  go  on,  while  yet  these  relations  have  not 
been  organized  into  the  abstracts  we  call  Space  and  Time  ;  and  so  there 
is  a  conceivable  kind  of  consciousness  which  does  not  contain  the  truths 
commonly  called  a  priori,  involved  in  the  organization  of  these  forms  of 
relations.” — H.  Spencer,  First  Pr.,  p.  258. 

2  The  forms  in  nature  which  we  denominate  laws,  how  do  they 
become  ideas  in  the  mind  ?  Only  it  would  seem  by  a  faculty  of  generali¬ 
zation  due  to  the  higher  Reason.  See  Arist.,  Anal.  Post.,  II.  xiv.  The 
facts  are  objective:  “  Toute  realite,”  says  Leibnitz,  “doit  etre  fondee 
dans  quelque  chose  d’existant ;  ”  but  it  is  the  mind  which  invests  them 
with  generality.  “What  we  call  a  general  law  is,  in  truth,  a  form  of 
expression  including  a  number  of  facts  of  like  kind.  The  facts  are 
separate;  the  unity  of  view  by  which  we  associate  them,  the  character 
of  generality  and  of  law,  resides  in  those  relations  which  are  the  object 
of  the  intellect.” -Whewell,  B.  T.,  p.  259.  See  Sir  W.  Hamilton, 
Lect.,  III.  78,  and  Ueberweg’s  Logic,  §§  38-44,  who,  however,  does  not 
escape  from  the  circle  of  employing  mathematical,  i.e.  objective,  con¬ 
ceptions,  which  are  themselves  only  guaranteed  by  our  inner  expe¬ 
rience. 


120 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  III. 


course  of  the  revelation  of  law  to  the  mind  of  man 
follow  the  very  law  or  constitution  of  his  mind  ? 
senseif  ^gain,  the  impossibility  of  all  creation  might  he 
of  Diw6  ar&ued  from  the  eternity  of  Gfod,  if  this  attribute 
operation.  were  indeed  other  than  the  negation  of  the  condi¬ 
tions  of  Time  in  the  case  of  an  Infinite  Being.1  Is 
the  case  different  in  respect  of  Law  as  a  mode  of 
Divine  operation  ?  When  it  gives  rise  to  similar 
perplexities,  is  it  to  he  held  incompatible  with  the 
notion  of  Providential  action  ? 

The  uni-  §  a,  Neither  can  it  be  assumed,  unless  rhetori- 

versality  0 

of  law  not  cally,2  that  at  present  the  reign  of  Law  is  as  wide 

yet  esta-  .  .  . 

biished,  as  the  world  in  which  we  live.  Many  an  ample 
demesne  of  thought  and  feeling,  of  social  action, 
nay,  of  physical  processes,  is  as  yet  but  partially 
explored,  and  remains  debateable  land.  M.  Comte, 
in  fact,  holds  that  many  phenomena  will  never  be 
brought  within  the  range  of  definite  laws,  because 
each  science,  as  it  increases  in  complexity,  admits 
also  of  greater  variations.3  This  is,  in  effect,  to 
repeat  the  axiom  of  Bacon,  that  “  the  subtilty  of 


TClVTa 


Se 


navra 


fxipr) 


XpOVOV ,  KCLL  TO  T  T)V  TO  T  eCTTCU,  ^pOVOV 


yeyovoTa  e’ldr],  a  8rj  (f)epoi/Tes  Xavdavopev  eVl  ttjv  atdiov  ovaiav  ovk 
opdcos. — Plato,  Timceus,  37,  E.  Cf.  August.,  Serm.  ad  Catech.,  c.  viii. : 
“Natus  est  aute  omnia  tempora;  natus  ante  omnia  sascula.  Natus 
ante  ;  aute  quid,  ubi  non  est  ante?”  &c.  There  was  an  old  view  (Id., 
Civ.  I).,  XI.  iv.)  that  the  world  was  eternal  not  in  time ,  but  in  respect 
of  its  creation.  This  savoured  too  much  of  a  saving  clause. 

2  “  Nothing  is  that  errs  from  law.” — Tennyson.  See  on  this  subject 
the  Duke  of  Argyll,  Reign  of  Law ,  p.  53,  and  Mozley,  B.  A.,  p.  325, 
and  some  fine  remarks  of  Dr.  Chalmers,  Works,  VII.  204. 

3  See  also  Littre,  Paroles  de  la  Phil.  Pos.,  p.  17. 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  121 

nature  far  surpasses  the  sub  til  ty  of  the  mind  of 
man.”  Let  it,  however,  be  conceded  that  there 
is  good  prospect  of  their  yielding  sooner  or  later  to 
the  advance  of  scientific  uniformity.  Certainly 
many  effects  in  nature  which  have  seemed  irregu¬ 
lar,  precarious,  lawless,  have  bowed  to  the  force  of 
inductive  analysis  and  suggestive  analogies,  until 
generalization  has  prevailed  in  these  also,  and 
they  have  taken  their  place  beside  the  earlier 
triumphs  of  scientific  inference.  Thus  has  arisen  yet  is  very 
that  habitual  recognition  of  the  notion  of  Law  assumed, 
which,  as  has  been  truly  said,  is  a  distinguishing 
characteristic  of  modern  from  ancient  thought.1 
It  may  also  be  conceded  that  the  Divine  Mind, 
if  conceived  as  projecting  its  fiat  upon  natural 
agents  in  the  form  of  universal  laws,  must  likewise 
be  apprehended  as  adequate  to  sustain  them 
through  any  limits  of  time  and  space.  The  hand 
which  has  so  moulded  can,  and,  indeed,  must 
equally  uphold  them,  and  enforce  their  operation.2 
Let  us,  then,  strive  to  estimate  the  result  of  the 

1  Herbert  Spencer,  First  Principles,  p.  142.  Yet  an  apprehension 
of  laws  of  nature  is  undoubtedly  very  ancient— lying  at  the  founda¬ 
tions  of  Greek  philosophy  and  poetry.  Comp.  Soph.,  (Ed.  T.,  865. 

Antig.,  455.  It  had  also  sunk  deep  into  the  Hebrew  mind  and  heart. 

Cf.  Ps.  148,  6.  Jer.  v.  22;  xiii.  23.  Eccles.  i.  4-7. 

2  “  La  conservation  de  Dieu  consiste  dans  cette  influence  immediate, 
perpetuelle,  que  la  dependance  des  creatures  demande.  Cette  depen- 
dance  a  lieu  a  l’egard  non-seulement  de  la  substance,  mais  encore  de 
l’action  ;  et  on  ne  sauroit  peut-etre  l’expliquer  mieux  qu’en  disant  avec 
le  commun  des  theologiens  et  des  philosophes,  que  c’est  une  creation 
continude.” — Leibnitz,  Works,  p.  512. 


122 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  III. 


and 

viewed  as 
the  term 
of  know¬ 
ledge. 


Facts, 
however, 
suggest  a 
further 
analysis. 


state  of  things  supposed.  When  the  physical 
antecedents  of  all  events  shall  have  been  assigned, 
the  tendencies  of  human  nature  mapped  out  and 
ascertained,  will  the  sum  of  man’s  knowledge  have 
been  reached,  and  with  it  the  limits  of  his  belief? 
Shall  we  then  “  know  even  as  we  are  known  ”  ? 

§  5.  The  attainment  of  a  clear  conception  of  law 
is  by  some  1  regarded  as  the  highest  point  attain¬ 
able  by  the  human  understanding.  “  The  sum  of 
all  education,”  says  Professor  Huxley,2  “  is  the 
instruction  of  the  intellect  in  the  laws  of  nature.” 
I  do  not  stay  to  remark  upon  the  narrowness  of 
such  a  view  of  human  nature,  when  we  take  into 
account  its  moral  and  spiritual  capacities ;  nor 
again,  on  its  logical  insufficiency  without  some 
postulate  as  to  the  origin  and  nature  of  things. 
But  does  it  correspond,  so  far  as  it  reaches,  with 
the  teaching  conveyed  by  the  facts  of  the  external 
world?  Is  there  no  region  suggested  to  us  in 
experience  above  the  level  of  material  causes? 
— no  law  higher  than  the  subsidiary  laws  which 
bind  particular  forces?  Is  there  no  element,  no 

Buckle,  Ihst.  Civ.,  II.  343.  “  La  methode  objective  ou  experience 
nc  par vicnt  qua  des  lois,  cost  son  supreme  effet,  rendant  de  plus  en 
plus  im person nelle  Pidee  de  Providence  il  va  se  perdre  d’une  fapon  plus 

ou  moins  confuse  dans  l’immanence  des  lois  qui  regissent  les  clioses.” _ 

Littre,  Paroles ,  p.  18. 

Pay  Sermons ,  p.  06.  See  also  the  magnificent  passage  commencing, 
1  hat  man,  1  think,  has  had  a  liberal  education, 5  &c.  It  altogether 
omits  any  spiritual  element  in  man.  Compare  Dr.  Westcott’s  remarks 
in  Cont.  Review ,  VIII.  378. 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


123 


“  law  within  the  law/’  required  to  account  for  the 
co-adjustment  of  phenomena  ?  It  is  such  an  ele¬ 
ment,  if  any,  which,  satisfying  this  unknown  yet 
necessary  coefficient,  answers  to  the  notion  of 
Providence,  to  the  movement  of  a  Supreme  Free 
Agent,1  of  One  who  is  not  content  to  reign  and 
not  to  govern.  The  distinction  very  commonly 
made  between  a  general  and  a  special  Providence 
may  prove  in  some  respects  misleading.  If  general 
without  being  special,  it  is  to  the  individual  soul 
no  Providence  at  all.  While  from  a  scientific 
point  of  view,2  the  intercalation  of  an  adjustment 
of  relations  between  agent  and  effect,  is  as  neces¬ 
sary  for  each  single  event  as  for  any  general  law 
of  uniform  results  arising  out  of  the  repetition  of 

1  “Is  there  above  the  level  of  material  causes  a  region  of  Providence  ? 
If  there  is,  Nature  there  is  moved  by  the  Supreme  Free  Agent,  and  of 
such  a  realm  a  miracle  is  the  natural  production.” — Mozley,  Bamp. 
Led.,  p.  164.  Compare  also  Prof.  Goldwin  Smith  {Led.,  II.  47) : 
“  This  God,  Who  is  to  reign  over  His  own  world  on  condition  that 
He  does  not  govern  it,  what  is  He — the  Supreme  Law  of  Nature  ?  ”  &c. 
In  his  Address  at  Liverpool,  p.  22,  Mr.  Gladstone  writes:  “On  the 
ground  of  what  is  termed  evolution,  God  is  relieved  of  the  labour  of 
creation  ;  in  the  name  of  unchangeable  laws,  He  is  discharged  from 
governing  the  world.” 

2  Leibnitz  very  justly  warns  that“il  faut  considdrer  aussi  que  l’action 

de  Hieu  conservant  doit  avoir  du  rapport  a  ce  qui  est  conserve,  tel  qu’il 
est,  et  selon  l’etat  ou  il  est :  ainsi  elle  ne  sauroit  etre  generate  ou  inde- 
terminee.  Ces  generalites  sont  des  abstractions  qui  ne  se  trouvent 
point  dans  la  verite  des  choses  singulieres.” — Works,  p.  511.  “The 
Laws  of  Nature  are  the  laws  which  the  Divine  Being  in  His  wisdom 
prescribes  to  His  own  acts.  His  universal  presence  is  the  necessary 
condition  of  any  course  of  events  ;  His  universal  agency  the  only  origin 
of  any  efficient  force.” — Whewell,  B.  T.,  p.  311.  “  Je  ne  demande  ni 

les  a'ieules,  ni  les  trisaieules  du  phenomene ;  je  me  contente  de  sa 
mere.” — De  Maistre,  Soirees,  p.  190. 


A  distinc¬ 
tion  made 
between 
general 
and  special 
Provi¬ 
dence. 


124 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  III. 


Insuf¬ 

ficient. 


Mislead¬ 

ing. 


Inappli¬ 
cable  to 
our  notions 
of  the 
Divine 
Being. 


individual  instances.  That  is  to  say,  the  notion  of 
general  laws  does  not  supersede  a  particular  Pro¬ 
vidence.  Ridicule  has,  indeed,  been  sometimes 
cast  upon  what  has  been  contemptuously  called 
“  a  carpenter  theory  ”  of  creation,  upon  the  notion 
of  “  a  clock-making  divinity,”  who  is  always  inter¬ 
fering  to  carry  out  the  plans  of  his  own  adminis¬ 
tration.  Why,  it  is  said,  should  not  all  this  have 
been  provided  for  by  a  single  original  act  through 
the  medium  of  general  laws  ?  Perhaps  this  may, 
after  all,  have  been  so.  But  who  shall  apply 
absolutely  to  the  Infinite  Mind1  (when  we  know 
so  little  of  our  own),  notions  drawn  solely  from 
human  experience,  and  limited  by  human  imper¬ 
fection  ;  or  distinguish  in  such  a  case  to  little 
purpose  between  an  eternal  ordinance  and  the 
individual  application  of  it  ?  To  Plim  there  can 
he  no  measure  of  time,2  hut  as  an  eternal  present ; 
(which,  to  sjdeak  exactly,  forms  no  part  of  time)  ; 
incompatible  alike  with  human  modes  of  thought 
or  with  secular  succession.3 


1  See  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  IV.  664,  with  tlie  quotation  from  Tere  Male- 
branche. 

2  “  M.  Bayle  sait  fort  bien  que  l’entendement  Divin  n’a  point  besoin 
de  temps,  pour  voir  la  liaison  des  cboses.  Tous  les  raisonnements  sont 
eminemment  en  Dieu,  et  ils  gardent  un  ordre  entre  eux  dans  son 
entendement  aussi  bien  que  dans  le  notre ;  mais  chez  Lui  ce  n’est 
qu’un  ordre  et  une  priori te  de  nature,  au  lieu  que  chez  nous  il  y  a  une 
priorite  de  temps.” — Leibnitz,  Theod .,  p.  563. 

3  “  Mentis  quippe  aspectu  omnem  mutabilitatem  ab  a3ternitate  sejungo 
et  in  ipsa  aeternitate  nulla  spatia  temporis  cerno.  Quia  spatia  temporis 
praderitis  et  futuris  rerum  motibus  constant.  Nihil  autem  praiterit  in 
aiterno  et  nihil  futurum  est,  quia  et  quod  prsetcrit  esse  desinit,  et  quod 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


125 


S  6.  The  presence  in  time  and  place  of  surround-  The  area 

1  .  ±  .  of  provi- 

ing  phenomena,  their  relations  accordingly  to  dentiai 
man’s  action  as  objects  of  desire,  or  as  conditions  01  e 
in  whatever  manner  of  his  conduct,  and  of  the 
consequences  of  his  conduct ;  these  constitute  the 
field  of  Providential  operation,1  and  lie  beyond  the 
compass  of  any  known  Law.  This  is  the  work  in 
time  of  the  Eternal  Spirit.  “  I  have  seen,”  writes 
the  Preacher,  “  the  travail  which  God  hath  given 
to  the  sons  of  men  to  be  exercised  in  it.  He  hath 


made  everything  beautiful  in  his  time  :  also  He 
hath  set  the  world  in  their  heart,  so  that  no  man 
can  find  out  the  work  that  God  maketh  from  the 
beginning  to  the  end.”  2  What  is  temptation  but 
the  presence  or  possibility  under  given  circum¬ 
stances  of  a  presumed  object  of  desire  ?  The  desire 
is  uniform,  the  opportunity  of  its  operation  contin¬ 
gent  and  variable.  What,  again,  is  the  lesson  of 

futurum  est  nondum  esse  ccepit ;  asternitas  autem  tantummodo  est,  nec 
fuit  quasi  jam  non  sit,  nec  erit  quasi  adliuc  non  sit.  Quare  sola  ipsa 
verissime  dicere  potuit  humane  menti — Ego  sum  qui  sum — et  de  ilia 
verissime  dici  potuit — Misit  me,  qui  est.” — Augustin,  de  Ver.  Bel., 
c.  xlix.  6  \povos  ov  Bokcl  avyKeicrdaL  ite  toov  vvv. — Arist.,  Phys.,  IV.  x. 
to  Se  vvv  icrTL  ( rwex^ia  xpovov. — c.  xiv.  See  Leibnitz,  Works ,  p.  615. 
Compare  Pr.  Mozley,  B.  L.,  p.  157. 

1  “  Conditrix  ac  moderatrix  temporum  Divina  Providentia.” — Au¬ 
gustin.  “  Ainsi  le  tout  revient  souvent  aux  circonstances,  qui  font  une 
partie  de  l’encbainement  des  choses.” — Leibnitz,  Theod .,  p.  530.  tempos 
navrcov  yve opas  ib-yci. — Soph.,  Philoct .,  837.  There  is  a  singular  pas¬ 
sage  in  Legge’s  Conf  ucius  (§  100)  to  the  same  effect :  “  How  does 
Heaven  speak  ?  The  four  seasons  have  their  course.  The  hundred 
things,  what  speaks  He  ?  No ;  Heaven  speaks  not :  by  the  course  of 
events  He  makes  Himself  understood  ;  no  more.” 

2  Eccles.  iii.  10,  11. 


126 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  III. 

human  affairs  if  not  the  need  of  energy,  genius, 

aSe^n  the  or^na^y>  °f  thought,  of  moral  force  ;  in  one  word, 
course  of  of  individual  character ;  in  necessary  correspon¬ 
dence,  however,  with  the  surrounding  circumstances, 
in  order  to  secure  large  and  lasting  consequences?1 

Such  souls,  ’tis  true,  but  peep  out  once  an  age, 

Dull  sullen  prisoners  in  the  body’s  cage. 

For,  however  superior  their  powers,  they  must 
confessedly  be  in  harmony  and  relation  with  their 
times.2  Their  very  greatness,  some  would  hold, 
comes  of  their  temperament,  and  that  temperament 
is  the  result  of  many  antecedents.  Mental  as  well 
as  physical  attributes  may  he  transmissible  by 
inheritance;3  and  a  '‘creational  law”  may  be 
imagined  to  explain  their  commencement.4  Some 

Ihe  laws,  says  Bp.  Butler,  “  by  which  persons  born  into  the 
world  at  such  a  time  and  place  are  of  such  capacities,  geniuses,  tempers 
.  .  .  .  aie  so  wholly  unknown  to  us,  that  we  call  the  events  which 
come  to  pass  by  them  accidental ;  though  all  reasonable  men  know 

certainly  that  there  cannot  in  reality  be  any  such  thing  as  chance.” _ 

Anal.,  II.  c.  iv.  Comp.  Augustin.,  Civ.  D .,  IV.  xxxiii. :  “  Neque  hoc 
temere  ;  .  .  sed  pro  rerum  ordine  ac  temporum  occulto  nobis,  notissimo 
sibi ;  cui  tamen  ordini  temporum  non  subditus  servit,  sed  eum  Ipse 
tanquam  dominus  regit  moderatorque  disponit.”  </)oph  yap  rls  ianv  iv 
rois  yiveaiv  avdpiov,  cbanep  iv  to7s  Kara  ras  x^pas  yiyvouivois. — Arist. 
Phet .,  II.  xv. ;  and  Pol.,  V.  xii.  8. 

2  Guizot  has  some  just  remarks  on  this  subject,  Civ.  en  France, ,  Lee. 
xx. :  “  The  activity  of  a  great  man  is  of  two  kinds.  First,  he  under¬ 
stands  better  than  others  the  wants  of  his  time;  its  real,  jiresent 
exigencies,”  &c. 

3  See  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  IV.  373,  397. 

^  Comp.  Di.  Mozley,  B.  L .,  p.  319.  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer,  First 
Pi .,  p.  123.  These  superior  powers  of  reason  or  fancy,”  says  Gibbon, 
c.  xxxviii.,  “  are  rare  and  spontaneous  productions.”  “  Est  casus 
aliquis,  says  Bacon,  non  minus  in  cogitationibus  humanis  quam  in 
operibus  et  factis.” — N.  0.,  Aph.  exxii. 


127 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CEIRIS TIA NIT V 

would  persuade  us  to  believe  that  with  all  their 
capacities,  and  aspirations,  and  beliefs,  they  are 
still  no  accident  indeed,  yet  a  product  of  their 
time.  But  what  shall  account  for  the  harmony  of  in  the 
the  given  antecedents ;  for  their  coincidence  and  dence  of 
correspondence;  for  the  melody1  which  pervades  an^ante- 
their  combination ;  for  the  co-proportions  and cedent’ 
correlations,  for  the  co-existence  and  co-ordination 
of  these  births  of  Time  ? 

Non  tunc  sine  nurnine  Divum 
Eveniunt. 

Do  they  not  of  themselves  call  for  the  notion  of 
Divine  superintendence  and  of  absolute  appoint¬ 
ment,  even  if  the  expression  of  interposition  be 
objected  to  ?  The  method  of  Nature,  even  in  ?nd  fom"  f 

°  7  bination  of 

physical  matters,  is  nowhere  the  predominance  of  asencies- 
any  single  principle,  but  the  joint-presence  and 
self-correcting  union  of  several.2  We  ask  not  for 
a  world  governed  by  isolated  acts  of  special  inter¬ 
vention,  of  perpetual  and  arbitrary  interference, 

1  “  Dieu  est  tout  ordre :  il  garde  toujours  la  justice  des  proportions : 
il  fait  Tharmonie  universelle.” — Leibnitz,  Theod.  In  Ver.  Bel.,  c.  xxii., 

Augustine  works  out  at  length  the  metaphor  of  a  harmony  or  strain 
pervading  the  administration  of  the  world.  Cf.  Prom.  V.,  55 6,  ovnore 
rav  A los  appovlav  dvarcov  7rape^lacri  fiovXal. 

When  these  prodigies 
Do  so  conjointly  meet,  let  not  men  say 
‘  These  are  their  reasons,  they  are  natural .’ 

Julius  Caesar. 

This  argument  is  carried  out  by  means  of  an  example  very  ably  in 
Dialogues  on  Divine  Providence ,  p.  111. 

2  “  Is  not  the  universe  pervaded  by  an  omnipresent  antagonism,  a 
fundamental  conjunction  of  contraries,  everywhere  opposite,  nowhere 
independent?” — Whewell,  Nov.  Org.  Benov.,  p.  270. 


128 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  III. 


An  ele¬ 
ment  scien¬ 
tifically 
admissible. 


The  bor¬ 
der  line  of 
the  natu¬ 
ral  and 
super¬ 
natural. 


irreconcilable  with  general  laws,  and  turning  his¬ 
tory,  as  has  been  aptly  said,  into  an  almanac.  We 
acknowledge  the  results  of  that  power  of  abstrac¬ 
tion  in  the  mind  of  man,  which,  growing  with 
education,  terminates  in  annihilating  all  personifi¬ 
cation  of  phenomena,  and  closes  what  has  been 
called  “  the  mythical  period  of  history.”  1  But,  on 
the  other  side,  this  view  of  life  and  being,  which 
sees  in  all  things  the  present  controlling  hand  of 
God,  cannot  be  charged  with  being  incapable  of 
proof.  It  rests  upon  and  is  an  illustration  of  the 
Method  of  Residues,  so  well  known  in  the  Logic  of 
Induction.2  For  it  represents  an  element  of  causa¬ 
tion,  a  surplus  of  unassigned  effect,  which  survives 
all  analysis  or  explanation  of  natural  events.  But 
if  the  element  thus  indicated  enters  as  a  necessary 
antecedent  into  a  scientific  account  of  things,  being 
one  which,  though  not  itself  otherwise  determin¬ 
able,  is  an  uniform  condition  of  phenomena  ;  who 
shall  set  limits  to  its  operation,  or  regard  any  the 
smallest  event  as  beyond  the  providential  arrange¬ 
ment  of  the  Almighty?  True,  the  natural  here 
merges  in  the  supernatural ;  a  special  providence, 
it  has  been  rightly  said,  is  an  invisible  miracle ;  it 
is  of  the  same  order  as  the  miracle  of  creation.3 


1  See  Mr.  Lecky,  Hist.  Eur.  Mor.,  I.  375. 

2  See  Mill’s  Logic ,  Ill.viii.  5  ;  Herschel’s  Discourse ,  §  158;  and  Mr. 
Fowler’s  singularly  clear  treatise  on  Inductive  Logic ,  p.  163. 

3  The  very  preservation  of  the  universe  being  a  continued  creation. 
See  Leibnitz,  Woi'hs ,  pp.  152, 615.  “  Dieu  n’agit  que  par  des  lois  generalcs. 
Je  l’accorde ;  mais  k  mon  avis  ccla  ne  suffitpas  pour  lever  les  miracles : 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


129 


But  it  is  not  the  less  real  for  being*  miraculous  ; 
nor  the  less  miraculous  because  through  simple 
1  epetition  we  cease  to  see  it  to  be  so.  u  Circum¬ 
stances,”  it  has  been  profoundly  said,1  “  traced 
back  to  their  first  origins,  may  be  the  outcome  of 
strictly  miraculous  intervention.  But  the  miracu¬ 
lous  intervention  addresses  us  at  this  day  in  the 
guise  of  those  circumstances.  There  is  no  law  of 
their  coincidence,  though  coincidences  rise  out  of  a 
combination  of  general  laws.  They  have  a  cha¬ 
racter  of  their  own,  and  seem  left  by  Providence  in 
His  own  hands,  as  the  channel  by  which,  inscrutable 
to  us,  He  may  make  known  to  us  His  will.”  Nor  Applica- 

*  tion  of* 

must  it  be  forgotten  that  we  are  dealing  not  only  general 
with  general  laws  which  may  be  considered  as  un-  dwkhlh! 
varying  in  their  operation,  but  with  their  appli¬ 
cation  to  particular  circumstances.  These  may  be 
so  arranged  as  to  effect  of  themselves  the  greatest 
amount  of  good  in  each  individual  case.  But 
among  these  we  are  entitled  to  include  the  de¬ 
cisions  of  the  human  will  which  may  or  may  not 
co-operate  with  the  arrangements  of  Eternal 
Wisdom.  In  this  manner  it  is  true  that  “  all 

si  Dieu  en  faisoit  cootinuellement,  ils  ne  laisseroient  pas  d’etre  des 
miracles,  en  prenant  ce  mot  non  pas  populairement  pour  une  chose  rare 
et  merveilleuse,  mais  philosophiquement  pour  ce  qui  passe  les  forces 
des  creatures.” 

1  J.  H.  Newman,  Gramm,  of  Assent,  pp.  422,  424.  Comp.  Eurip. 

Ilec.,  1.  958  : 

< pvpovaL  8  avTa  6eo\  tvuKiv  re  kcu  npoaio, 
rapaypov  evTiOevres,  cos  ayvooala 
tlfftoopcv  CIVTOVS. 


1C 


130 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  III. 


Science 
predictive 
only  of 
tendencies. 


Variety 
and  irregu¬ 
larity  ob¬ 
servable  in 
Nature. 


things  work  together  for  good  to  those  that  love 
Gfod,”  who  ponder  the  direction  of  His  providence, 
and  leave  room  for  the  suggestions  of  His  grace.1 

§  7.  On  no  other  supposition  does  it  seem  pos¬ 
sible  to  reconcile  the  apparent  fortuity  of  human 
affairs2  with  their  admitted  regularity,  and  with 
the  observed  uniformity  of  Nature.  It  is  the 
boasted  test  of  Science  to  be  predictive;3  to  fore¬ 
tell  consequences  with  unerring  exactness.  Yet, 
of  what  is  it  really  predictive  ?  Of  tendencies ; 
not  of  positive  results,  nor  of  particular  events  ; 
but  rather  that  these  will  take  place  under  given 
circumstances,  i.  e.  under  identical  circumstances. 
Experience,  that  is,  custom,  leads  us  to  expect  a 
repetition  of  the  circumstances.  Yet,  the  variety  of 
Nature  is  as  wonderful  as  is  her  uniformity :  and 
it  is  a  well-known  principle  in  physics  that  no  two 
individual  products  agree  exactly  in  all  respects. 


No  compound  of  this  earthly  ball 
Is  like  another  all  in  all. 


Now,  this  evident  irregularity  in  the  case  of 


1  As  to  the  bearings  of  a  doctrine  of  Providence  upon  the  practice  of 
prayer  Leibnitz  shrewdly  observes,  “  Dans  le  fond,  les  hommes  se  con- 
tenteront  d’etre  exauces,  sans  se  mettre  en  peine  si  le  cours  de  la  Nature 
est  change  en  leur  faveur  011  non.  Et  s’ils  sont  aides  par  le  secours  des 
bons  Anges,  il  n’y  aura  point  de  changement  dans  l’ordre  general  des 
choses.” — Remarques  sur  le  livre  de  M.  King  ( Works,  p.  651). 

2  See  Isaac  Taylor  on  Enthusiasm,  p.  129 :  “  But  there  is  a  higher 
government  of  men,”  &c.  He  is  needlessly  criticised  by  Mr.  Greg, 
Creed  of  Christendom .  See  also  Mr.  Hutton,  Essays,  I.  42 :  “  And 
this  instinctive  conviction,”  &c. 

3  Comp.  Whewell,  Phil.  Ind.  Sc.,  I.  xxxix.,  Nov.  Org.  Ren.,  II.  v.  10 ; 
Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  I.  G2 ;  II.  28,  401,  426 ;  III.  10,  304,  407-13 ;  and 
Mr.  Fowler’s  remarks,  Ind.  Logic,  p.  112. 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OP"  CHRISTIANITY. 


I3i 

human  affairs,1  is  attributed  (not  indeed  very  con¬ 
sistently)  by  thinkers  of  the  Positive  school,  to 
special  but  undiscovered  laws,  or  to  the  acknow¬ 
ledged  intricacy  of  the  antecedents  masking  the 
essential  relations  of  the  phenomena,  to  the  plu¬ 
rality  and  composition  of  causes,  to  the  intermixture 
of  effects,  and  the  like ;  which  is,  in  fact,  no  ex¬ 
planation  at  all.  Yet  there  is  surely  point  in  import- 
the  sarcasm  of  Pascal,2  that  had  the  nose  of  Cleo- 
patia  been  shorter,  the  whole  face  likewise  of  the 
world’s  history  might  have  been  changed.  Or, 
again,  that  a  grain  of  gravel  in  the  person  of  a 
Cromwell,  sufficed  to  give  peace  to  a  Continent, 
restoration  to  a  dynasty,  and  tranquillity  to  the 
alarms  of  Pome.  “  Accidents  of  personal  character,” 
writes  Hallam,  a  have  more  to  do  with  the  revo¬ 
lutions  of  nations  than  either  philosophical  histo¬ 
rians  or  democratic  politicians  like  to  admit.”  No 
cycle,  indeed,  in  human  affairs,4  no  theory  of  “  social 

^  .^r’  buckle,  Hist .  Civ.,  III.  479,  observes  with  some  asperity, 

‘  Science  has  not  yet  explained  the  phenomena  of  history.  Conse¬ 
quently  the  theological  spirit  lays  hold  of  them,  and  presses  them  into 
her  own  service.” 

2  Pemees,  xix.  7  :  “  Le  nez  de  CldopStre,  s’il  eftt  6t6  plus  court,  toute 

la  face  de  la  terre  aurait  change.”  xx.  8 :  “  Cromwell  allait  ravager  toute 
la  Chretiente,”  &c. 

3  Middle  Ages ,  I.  132 :  “  It  is  almost  appalling,”  remarks  Dean 
Church  {Univ.  Serm.),“  to  watch  how  some  vast  change  in  human 

aft  airs  has  hung  upon  the  apparent  accident  of  a  stronger  or  weaker 
character.” 

Magnus  ab  integro  sasclorum  nascitur  ordo.  <Iwi  Ak'Kop  Hvai  ra 
avOpuTriva  npaypara.—Arist.,  Plugs.,  IV.  xiv.  See  Mill’s  Logic ;  I.  420 
(1st  ed.).  The  theory  of  Vico  is  well  known.  Compare  Augustin., 

Civ.  D.,  XII.  xi.  xiii.,  and  Origen,  c.  Cels.,  IV.  lxvii. 

K  2 


V 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  III. 


132 

rhythm,”  u equilibration,”  or  “ recurring  oscillation” 
will  solve  this  mighty  mystery ;  though  history, 
like  a  circulating  decimal  of  many  figures,  “  should 
periodically  repeat  itself,”  and  things  revolve  in  an 
eternal  round.  The  problem  is  one  into  which  too 
many  factors  enter.1  There  is,  indeed,  an  error 
assump°f  has  too  often  brought  contempt  on  the  ac- 

thTcomse  knowledgment  of  a  special  Providence ;  which  lies 

dence°V1"  moilopoliz:ing'  and  appropriation  of  it.2  In 

this  way 

Men  may  construe  things  after  their  fashion 
Clean  from  the  purpose  of  the  things  themselves. 

To  leave,  however,  the  existence  of  a  controlling 
Providence  an  open  question  subverts  the  conditions 
necessary  to  constitute  a  religion.  But,  if  the 
entrance  of  a  supernatural  element  into  the  course 
of  human  affairs  be,  indeed,  requisite  for  any  really 
philosophical  explanation  of  them,  the  incompati¬ 
bility  of  general  Laws  with  the  wants  of  the  reli¬ 
gious  sentiment  can  no  longer  be  urged.  The 

1  “  History,”  it  has  been  cleverly  said,  “  like  the  dial  of  a  clock, 
presents  results,  but  conceals  the  machinery  producing  them.” 

2  “  Historia  Nemeseos  sank  in  calamos  nonnullorum  piorum  virorum 
incidit :  sed  non  sine  partium  studio .” — Bacon,  Augm.  Sc  ,  II.  xi,  “  To 
him,”  says  Montaigne,  Ess.,  I.  xxv.,  “  who  feels  the  hailstones  patter 
about  his  ears,  the  whole  hemisphere  appears  to  be  in  a  storm.”  There 
is  a  French  saying,  “  La  providence  des  chats  n’est  pas  la  meme  avec 
la  providence  des  souris.”  On  this  subject  Mr.  Buckle,  Hist.  Civ.,  III. 
19o,  has  some  caustic  remarks.  Elsewhere  (I.  19,  n.)  he  gratuitously 
confounds  the  doctrine  of  Providential  interference  with  that  of  Pre¬ 
destination.  See  some  just  reflections  of  Mr.  Lecky,  Hist.  E.  M.,  I. 
381,  and  some  noble  thoughts  of  Prof.  Gold  win  Smith  (Study  of  Hist. 
Lect.  I.  31). 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


133 


“  kingdoms  of  the  world  ”  may  still  “  become  the 
kingdom  of  the  Lord  and  of  His  Christ  ”  ;  and 
this  in  virtue  of  an  operation  determined  by  no 
such  laws  ol  time  as  to  compel  the  inference 
that  it  was  not  so  fixed  from  eternity,  or  is  not  so 
arranged  at  any  given  moment  by  an  immediate 
and  ever-present  disposition.1 

§  8.  One  of  the  acutest  thinkers  of  our  time,  This  con 
who  has  passed  away  not  many  months  since,  justly  drawn1 
lamented,  has  contended  for  the  special  interposi-  perknce". 
tion  of  Grod  by  the  side  of  general  Laws,  on  the 
ground  that  both  are  alike  conditions  of  human 
thought,  seeing  that  we  cannot  think  the  general 
without  the  special.2  At  present  I  would  dwell 
rather  on  the  objective  side  of  experience.  The 
importance  of  distinguishing  between  the  causes 
and  the  occasions  of  events  has  often  been  observed.3 


1  “  Le  present,”  finely  remarks  Leibnitz  (Works,  p.  608),  “  est  gros 
de  Pavenir;”  or  as  Schiller  puts  it,  “  Im  Heute  wandelt  schon  das 
Morgen.”  It  is  an  error,  however,  to  assume  the  determining  causes 
of  events  to  he  necessary  in  any  case  where  a  counter  result  is  con¬ 
ceivable.  The  will  of  God  is  not  incompatible  either  with  contingency 
in  things  or  liberty  in  the  creature.  The  main  argument  of  this  work, 
however,  does  not  proceed  on  any  forced  or  fanciful  application  of 
special  acts  of  Providence.  Christianity  is  the  concurrent  result  of  pre¬ 
ceding  events  and  precedent  conditions.  As  such  it  is  a  fact  in  mau’s 
history,  which  goes  for  much,  and  implies  further  consequences  in  the 
undoubted  pre-arrangement  of  God. 

2  Dean  Mansel,  Bampton  Led.,  p.  193. 

3  Polyb.,  III.  vi.  6,  dp^rj  tl  dia(f)epei  Kal  tvoctop  diecrTrjKev  curias  Kal 
7rp  o(p  acre  cos*  Hence  Aristotle’s  distinction  of  Poetry  from  History  : 
r out (p  8t.a(f)€pei,  rc5  top  pep  ret  yepopepa  \eyeip,  top  de’  ola  ap  yepoiro. 
A 10  Kal  (f)i\ocro(f)o)Tepop  Kal  anovdaioTcpop  Trolrjcris  laroplas  icrrlp. — 
Poet.,  c.  ix. ;  a  thought  expanded  by  Bacon  in  Augm.  Sc.,  11.  xiii.  Hence 


i34 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  III. 


The  laws 
distinct 
from  the 
occasions 
of  events. 


The  former,  rightly  deemed  the  “  eternal  lessons  of 
History,”  are  occupied  with  the  tendencies,  rather 
than  the  occurrences  of  the  time :  while  occasions, 
exhibiting  principles  in  the  garb  of  events,  con¬ 
stitute  the  web,  and  not  the  warp,  of  human  affairs. 
But  though  the  effect  be  proportioned  to  the  cause, 
and  the  motor  ideas  of  an  age  are  relative  to  its 
position  in  the  course  of  human  progress,  (thns, 
it  may  be  admitted,  Bacon  and  Descartes  would 
have  been  powerless  in  the  seventh  or  the  tenth 
century)  ;  yet  the  circumstances  which  attend  their 
announcement  may  be  favourable  or  unfavourable, 
and  admit  of  no  uniform  analysis.  But  they  are 
not  therefore  to  be  left  out  of  account.  Hence, 
Mr.  Mill/  (no  mean  authority),  holds  the  author 
of  the  ‘  History  of  Civilization  in  England’  to  be  in 
error,  when  “  he  attributes  all  to  general  causes 
without  imagining  that  casual  circumstances,  the 
acts  of  governments,  the  thoughts  of  men  of 

also  his  conception  (lb.,  II.  viii.)  of  an  Universal  History.  So  Johnson 
remarked  that  Shakspeare’s  characters  “are  mostly  species,  not  indi¬ 
viduals.”  See  Hallam,  M.  A.,  I.  66,  and  Mr.  Buckle,  Hist.  Civ.,  II. 
317,  324,  who  cites  Montesquieu  and  adds,  “the  real  history  of’ the 
human  race  is  the  history  of  tendencies,  which  are  perceived  by  the 
mind,  and  not  ot  events  which  are  discerned  by  the  senses.”  Mr. 

1  attison  remarks,  with  his  usual  discrimination,  that  Mr.  Buckle, 
having  begun  with  defining  history  as  an  inquiry  into  the  laws  of 
events,  proceeds  to  a  mere  narration.  Comte,  if  I  remember  rightly, 
somewhere  proposes  to  write  a  history,  without  names  of  individuals  el¬ 
even  of  nations.  See  Phil.  Pos .,  V.  22,  268.  He  thus  delineates  the 

respective  destinies  of  Athens,  Rome,  Carthage,  and  even  of  Christianity 
itself. 

1  A.  Comte  and  Positivism,  p.  114. 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


135 


genius,  materially  accelerate  or  retard  human  pro¬ 
gress.”  Such  incredulity  gives  rise  to  an  oppo¬ 
site  exaggeration,  when  it  is  maintained  that  u  the 
history  of  the  world  is  but  the  biography  of 
great  men.”1  This  is,  indeed,  not  to  be  able  to 
“  see  the  forest  for  the  trees.”  Doubtless,  there 
have  been  turning-points  in  the  world’s  story. 
At  Marathon,  at  Metaurus,  at  Tours,  the  worship 
of  Ormuzd,  of  Bel,  of  Mahomet  trembled  in  the 
scale.  Victory  hung  upon  the  standards  of  the 
strongest,  if  not  the  biggest  battalions,  or  on  those 
which  were  most  ably  Jed,  or  on  both  combined. 
Yet,  how  is  it  that  it  has  passed  into  a  proverb  that 
44  the  race  is  not  always  to  the  swift,  the  battle 
to  the  strong :  but  time  and  chance  happeneth 
unto  all  ”  ? 2  It  is  not  then  “  gratuitous  ”  to  assert  a 
Providential  element  in  history ;  for  it  has  a  real 
ground  in  experience.  Facts  suggest  it  to  a  serious 
mind  ;  and  though  in  ruder  times  this  element  has 
had  too  large  scope  assigned  it,  this  only  warns  us 
to  confine  it  within  due  limits.  There  is  at  present 

1  Carlyle,  Hero  Worship ;  though  Guizot  rightly  reckons  them  as  a 
separate  element  in  the  history  of  civilization.  Civ.  en  K,  I.  56  :  “  No  one 
can  say  why  a  great  man  appears  at  a  certain  epoch,  and  what  he  adds  to 
the  development  of  the  world.  That  is  a  secret  of  Providence  :  but 
the  fact  is  not  therefore  less  certain.”  “  The  riddle  of  fortune  or  cir¬ 
cumstance,”  says  Coleridge,  “  is  but  a  form  or  effluence  of  the  riddle  of 
man.” 

2  Eccles.  ix.  11.  It  was  no  immature  thinker  who  observed  upon 
such  facts  as  these,  that 

This  should  teach  us 
There’s  a  Divinity  that  shapes  our  ends, 

Rough-hew  them  how  we  will.  That  is  most  certain. 


Appeal 

history. 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  Ill 


Personifi¬ 
cation  of 
general 
laws  by 
recent 
writers, 


unphilo- 

sophical. 


1 36 


an  aspect  of  history  much  in  vogue,  in  which  Ge¬ 
neral  Laws  are  as  much  personified  as  in  mythical 
periods  ot  thought.  i(  The  Tower  of  Siloam,”  says 
a  brilliant  writer,1  “  fell  not  for  any  sins  of  the 
eighteen  who  were  crushed  by  it:  but  through 
bad  mortar  probably,  the  rotting  of  a  beam,  or  the 
uneven  settling  of  the  foundations.  The  persons 
who  should  have  suffered  according  to  our  notion 
of  distributive  justice,  were  the  ignorant  architects 
or  masons  who  had  done  their  work  amiss.  But 
the  guilty,  perhaps,  had  long  been  turned  to  dust. 
And  the  law  of  gravitation  brought  the  tower 
down  at  its  own  time ,  indifferent  to  the  persons  who 
might  be  under  it.  Does  not  such  language  show 
that  there  may  be  a  Fetishism  latent  in  the  highest 
abstractions?2  For  myself,  I  do  not  see  that  the 
planetary  spirits  of  Origen  or  Kepler  are  more 


1  Mr.  Froude  on  Calvinism,  Short  Studies ,  II.  Ser.  p.  11.  Another 
instance  may  be  cited  from  a  more  exact  thinker.  “  The  Law  of  Gravi¬ 
tation,”  writes  Professor  Tyndall,  Fragm.  T.,  p.  45,  «  crushes  the  simple 
worshippers  of  Ottery  St.  Mary,  while  singing  their  hymns,  just  as 
surely  as  if  they  were  engaged  in  a  midnight  brawl.”  “  J’ai  lu  ”  says 
De  Maistre,  “  des  millions  de  plaisanteries  sur  l’ignorance  des  anciens 
qui  voyaient  des  esprits  partout.  II  me  semble  que  nous  sommes 

beaucoup  plus  sots,  nous  qui  n’en  voyons  nulle  part.” — Soirees  Vme 
Entret.,  p.  188. 

On  this  subject  there  is  something  noble  in  the  indignation  of  M. 
Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  V.  42.  “  De  nos  jours  meme  qu’est-ce  reellement,  pour 
un  esprit  positif,  que  ce  tenebreux  Pantheisme  dont  se  glorifient  si 
etrangement,  surtout  en  Allemagne,  tant  de  profonds  metaphysiciens 
“  n0U  e  ^Uchisme  generalise  et  systematise,  enveloppe  d’un  appareil 
doctoral  propre  a  donner  le  change  au  vulgaire  ?  ”  In  V.  49  he  remarks 
that  an  age  of  metaphor  has  now  succeeded  to  the  Fetishism  of  an 
earlier  time.  Compare  Mr.  Tylor,  Hist.  Prim.  Cult. ,  1.  204. 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


137 


unreasonable  than  Gravitation  made  into  an  agent. 

It  may  be  through  general  and  permanent  Laws 
(to  call  them  immutable,  involves  an  assumption 
incapable  of  proof)  that  the  Providence  of  God 
presides  over  the  order,  better  perhaps  to  say, 
the  endless  play,  of  the  universe.1  But  it  would 
be  more  exact  to  give  them  another  name.  They 
are  the  continuously  active  will  of  an  ever-present 
God  in  its  exercise  upon  the  world  of  its  creation  ; 
for  where  the  laws  are,  there  is  the  Lawgiver  also.2 

§  9.  We  conclude,  then,  that  in  the  hypothesis  Natural 
°f  universal  Law,  and  in  the  fact,  if  it  be  a  fact,  ^tibie 
that  the  history  of  physical  science  is  one  continued  ^oviden- 
revelation  of  the  reign  of  Law,  there  is  nothing  ofchris-1® 
antecedently  fatal  to  Christianity  as  a  religion  for  tianity’ 
mankind.  For  if  otherwise,  it  must  be  so  in  respect 
either  of  its  special  contents,  or  of  the  fundamen¬ 
tal  evidences  adduced  in  its  support;  I  mean  of 

1  It  is  a  truer  instinct  which,  with  Malebranche,  sees  all  things  in 
God.  “  Whether  a  dagger,”  says  De  Maistre,  “  pierces  a  man’s  heart 
or  a  little  blood  collects  in  his  brain,  he  falls  dead  alike.  But  in  the 
lirst  case  we  say  he  has  ended  his  days  by  a  violent  death.  For  God, 
however,  there  is  no  such  thing  as  violent  death.  A  steel  blade  fixed 
in  the  heart  is  a  malady  just  like  a  simple  callosity,  which  we  should 
call  a  polypus.” — Soirees ,  IVme  Entret. 

Guizot,  Meditat .,  Vol.  I.  p.  33.  Newton’s  Scholium  on  the  nature 
ol  God  is  thus  worded :  “  Entis  summe  perfecti  idea  ut  sit  substantia 
una ;  omnia  in  se  continens  tanquam  eorum  principium  et  locus ; 
omnia  per  pnesentiam  substantial em  cernens  et  regens  et  cum  rebus 
omnibus  secundum  leges  accuratas  ut  naturse  totius  fundamentum  et 
causa,  constanter  co-operans,  nisi  ubi  aliter  agere  bonum  est.”  See  in 
Brewster’s  Memoirs ,  II.  154.  Compare  the  description  of  the  Koran 
(Sale,  I.  c.  vi.,  p.  166). 


nor  with 
its  evi¬ 
dences, 


viz. 

miracles. 


These  ad¬ 
mit  of  dis¬ 
crimina¬ 
tion. 


1 38  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  HI. 


Miracles  and  Prophecy,  “  that  splendid  apparatus 
with  which  its  mission  was  introduced  and  at¬ 
tested.  1  Into  the  nature  of  these  evidences  I  am 
not  now  called  to  enter.  For  the  subject  of 
Miracles,  the  magnificent  dialectical  effort  made 
not  very  long  since  from  this  place,  must  deter, 
while  rendering  unnecessary,  all  inferior  handling 
of  the  same  topic.  I  would  remark  only  in  answer 
to  a  more  recent  objection,2  that  if  it  be  true  that  as 
men  advance  from  an  imperfect  to  a  higher  civili¬ 
zation,  they  gradually  sublimate  and  refine  their 
creed,  exhibiting  an  indisposition,  in  place  of  an 
earlier  proneness,  towards  the  reception  of  the 
miraculous:  it  may  still  be  replied,  that  Christianity, 
as  it  has  become  better  understood,  has  borne  this 
test.  Already  in  the  long  history  of  the  Church, 
we  have  learned  to  distinguish  between  true  and 
false  miracles,  evangelical  and  ecclesiastical,  evi¬ 
dential  and  doctrinal,  intrinsic  and  spurious  imita¬ 
tions.  The  tendency  of  superstition  to  multiply 
miracles  does  not  disprove  their  probability,  much 
less  their  possibility  :  it  rather  goes  to  establish 
the  instinctive  nature  of  their  recognition.  A 
truer  estimate  of  the  position- of  Miracles  in  relation 


1  Paley,  Moral  Phil.,  Bk.  IY.  sub  fin. 

2  See  Mr*  Lecky>  Sist.  Pat.,  I.  160-195.  Hist .  Eur.  Mor.,  I.  370, 
38o,  &c.  Jean  Paul  Kichter  acutely  remarks,  Vorschule  der  Aesthetik, 
Horks,  xix.  163,  that  the  greatest  miracle  is  our  tendency  to  believe  in 
miracles,  surrounded  as  we  are  by  the  mechanical  kingdom  of  our 
senses  :  that  in  spite  ol  continual  contact  with  the  world  of  matter  wc 
still  believe  in  an  invisible  world. 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


139 


to  faith,  has  taken  possession  of  the  Christian  mind. 

“  The  ideal1  of  the  Church’s  life,”  it  has  been  well 
said,  “  is  not  the  predominance  of  the  supernatural  : 
but  the  intimate  and  complete  union  of  the  human 
and  the  Divine.”  The  proof  from  Miracles2  Au- The  vary- 

.  ing  co- 

gusfme  thought  was  not  suited  to  every  age,  or  to  gency  of 

,,  .  .  .  Christian 

all  minds.  On  the  large  and  important  evidence  evidences 
of  Prophecy,  which  to  the  mind  of  Pascal,3  (as  phecy!° 
previously  to  that  of  Augustine  and,  as  it  would 
seem,  of  the  earlier  Fathers),  superseded  Miracles  ; 
it  may  perhaps  be  said  that  it  still  awaits  a  treat¬ 
ment  in  unison  with  the  spirit  of  the  time.  At 
present  I  would  only  observe  that  there  is  nothing 
in  its  nature  essentially  contradictory  to  experience. 

On  the  contrary,  it  is  consistent  and  according 
with  expectation,  so  long  as  there  is  admitted  a 
Di  vine  superintendence  of  events  passing  insen¬ 
sibly  into  a  continuous  interposition,  and  acting  in 

conjunction  with  fixed  and  general  laws.  It  is  a  Their  ful¬ 
filment  a 
matter  of 

1  Pressense,  Apostles  and  Martyrs ,  p.  16.  fact. 

2  Util.  Cred.,  c.  xiv. ;  Ver.  Eel.,  c.  xxv.  “  Cur,  inquis,  ista  (sc.  mira- 
cula)  modo  non  fiunt?  Quia  non  nioverent  nisi  mira  essent :  at  si 
solita  essent,  mira  non  essent.” — Ut.  Cred.,  c.  xvi.  He  also  argues  that 
miracles  are  rather  a  proof  to  the  ignorant  than  to  the  wise. 

3  “La  plus  grande  des  preuves  de  Jesus-Christ,  ce  sont  les  pro- 
pheties.” — Pensees,  Art.  X.  “  Hujus  religionis  sectandm  caput  est  historia 
et  prophetia  dispensationis  temporalis  Divinse  Providentim  pro  salute 
generis  humani  inteternam  vitam  reformandi  atque  reparandi.” — August., 

Ver.  Eel.,  c.  vii.  13,  xxv.  See  Pressense,  u.  s.,  tom.  ii.  Lecky,  H.  E.  M., 

I.  399.  The  teleological  character  of  Christianity  in  relation  to  the 
history  and  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  itself  a  fruit  of  “  the 
fullness  of  the  time,”  is  a  subject  wholly  in  accord  with  recent  phi¬ 
losophy. 


140 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  III. 


different  question  which  has  been  sometimes  asked, 
whether  Christianity  has  in  its  career  answered 
the  expectations  of  the  old  prophecies  respecting* 
it.  Thus,  the  kingdom  of  Christ  is  by  no  means 
as  yet  universal:  uwe  see  not  yet  all  things  put 
under  Him  nor  in  the  history  of  the  Church  has 
Christianity  shown  itself  a  religion  of  peace.  But 
it  has  been  well  replied,1  that  it  has  fulfilled  Pro¬ 
phecy  far  enough  to  make  the  portrait  like  :  and 
by  predicting  its  own  future,  answers  any  such 
difficulties  by  anticipation.  If  destined  to  be  uni¬ 
versal,  Christ’s  kingdom  is  still  in  a  manner  “  not 
of  this  world.”  It  is  created  and  established,  not 
by  force,  but  by  persuasion ;  and  persuasion  must 
be  always  gradual  and  often  precarious.  It  did  not 
engage  to  abolish  sin  and  irreligion,  even  within 
its  pale :  the  tares  should  still  spring  among  the 
wheat.  Its  very  progress  was  to  be  made  through 
defeat :  it  was  to  conquer  by  sanctity  and  suffering. 
Themys-  §  Jo.  Some  elements,  it  must  be  admitted,  when 
Christian  we  are  considering  the  progress  and  permanence 
not  liable  Christianity,  within  the  circle  of  Christian  doc- 
exPPwal  trine  must  ever  be  expected  to  remain  stumbling- 
tlon*  blocks  to  the  naked  intellect ;  more  especially  when 
it  surrenders  itself  to  the  narrow  dogmas  of  a 
purely  physical  philosophy.  There  are  beings, 
as  Bishop  Butler  has  suggested,2  to  whom  the 


1 

2 


J.  H.  Newman,  Gramm,  of  Assent ,  p.  441. 

Analogy,  1 1. 1.  c.  i. :  “  Nor  is  there  any  absurdity  in  supposing,”  &c. 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


141 


scheme  of  Christianity  in  all  its  details  may  appear 
strictly  natural.  But  to  us  it  is  not  so.  The 
coming  of  the  Son  of  Grod  in  the  flesh,  the 
Absolute  thus  becoming  relative,  the  Infinite 
finite,  the  Creator  a  creature ;  the  spiritual  import 
of  death  a  natural  phenomenon  ( lex  non  poena 
mors)  ;  the  relation  of  sin  to  its  effects ;  the  fall 
and  corruption  of  man  ;  the  necessity  of  Redemp¬ 
tion  ;  the  fact  of  its  taking  place  in  a  single  tiny 
world,  lost  as  it  were  in  the  infinity  of  surrounding 
space  crowded  with  kindred  orbs  ;l  these  are  and 
must  be  accepted  as  mysteries,  “  clouds  on  the 
mercy-seat,”  capable  perhaps  of  explanation,  yet 
only  of  an  imperfect  one,  unpalatable  accordingly 
to  a  positive  school  of  inquiry.  Yet  Mysteries  are  Mysteries 
the  properties  of  all  genuine  religions,  in  regard  to  pertyofaii 
which  the  believer  “  walks  by  faith  and  not  by  sight.”  feHgions. 
Thus  “  the  consciousness  of  a  mystery,”  it  has  been 
rightly  said,2  “  is  traceable  in  the  rudest  Fetishism.” 

The  economy  of  Revelation  in  respect  of  them,  it 
may  be,  differences  Christianity  favourably  from 
other  religions.3  But  whatever  may  he  thought  as 

1  Chalmers’s  discourses  on  this  topic  are  well  known.  Comp.  pp.  54, 98 : 

“  Impossible  that  the  concerns  of  this  puny  ball,  which  floats  its  little 
round  among  an  infinity  of  larger  worlds,  should  be  of  such  mighty 
account  in  the  plans  of  the  Eternal,”  &c. 

2  See  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer,  First  Pr .,  p.  99  :  “  En  articles  de  foi,” 
it  has  been  beautifully  said,  “  il  faut  se  crever  les  yeux  pour  voir  clair.” 

“  La  raison,”  writes  Vinet,  “  a  sa  foi ;  la  foi  a  sa  raison.” 

3  Viz.  by  confining  them  to  truths  answering  to  the  deepest  wants  of 
our  spiritual  frame.  “  Ce  qui  en  nous  est  contraire  aux  mystkres,  n’est 
pas  la  raison,  ni  la  lumiere  naturelle  l’enchainement  des  vdrites  ;  c’est 


142 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  III. 


Under¬ 
standing 
not  the 
measure  of 
belief. 


to  this,  they  are  at  least  no  new  difficulties,  no  new 
grounds  of  objection.  Nothing  about  them  requires 
to  be  given  up  in  the  present  stage  of  our  know¬ 
ledge  as  the  creed  of  an  ignorant  and  bygone 
age.  We  are  still  far  from  the  axiom  that  nothing 
can  be  true  but  what  we  can  fully  understand.1 
Rationalism  and  Mysticism  are,  indeed,  opposite 


extremes,  between  which  it  may  well  be  the  human 
mind  will  always  continue  to  oscillate,  meeting, 
however,  in  one  common  point.  Mysteries  are  not 
contradictions  to  reason  or  to  fact.  We  should 
else  be  holding  our  religious  faith  on  sufferance 
of  ignorance  or  error.  In  effect,  the  old  adage, 
u  omnia  exeunt  in  mysterium”  is  even  now  the  out¬ 
come  of  a  philosophy  of  experience,  the  justification 
ol  a  system  of  nescience.  “  The  world,”  said  Hume, 
“  is  a  mystery  and  beyond  all  that  science  makes 
Rational-  known  to  us  lies  the  mysterious  unknown.2  But 

ism  and  .  ,  , 

mysticism  so  again  the  latent  error  of  Mysticism  in  religion 
tiveiyerro-  is  tlie  aiming  at  a  comprehension  of  transcen¬ 
dental  truth,  at  the  fruition  of  a  mental  certainty 
which  it  is  not  given  us  to  acquire  or  possess  ; 


corruption,  c’est  errenr  ou  prejuge,  cest  tenebres.”— Leibnitz,  The'od., 
p.  496.  Paley  has  some  good  remarks  on  this  point,  Evid.  II.  ii.,  con¬ 
trasting  the  reserve  of  the  Bible  with  the  redundance  of  the  Koran. 

1  Comp.  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  V.  66.  It  is  true  that  there  is  an  exactly 
opposite  error  in  which  Pevelation  itself  is  confounded  with  Mystery. 
“  Times,”  says  Dr.  Dorner,  Ilist.  Prot.  Th.,  II.  255,  “  unfruitful  in  theolo¬ 
gical  knowledge,  are  ever  wont  to  fall  back  on  mystery,  and  upon  the  much 
abused  demand  of  taking  the  reason  prisoner  to  the  obedience  of  faith.” 

2  See  Herbert  Spencer,  First  Princ.>  p.  223. 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  143 


just  as  in  practice  it  is  realized  in  the  abandon¬ 
ment  of  free-will  in  its  devotion  to  a  pre-assumed 
will  of  Grod.  It  thus  really  involves  the  assump¬ 
tion  of  mental  independence,  and  runs  up  into  the 
Schoolmen’s  postulate  that  reason  ultimately  obliges 
to  believe  all  that  faith  receives.1  The  difficulties 
occurring  in  the  system  of  Christianity  form  part 
of  the  Divine  administration,  the  proper  subject- 
matter  of  Revelation,  being  confessedly  beyond  the 
reach  of  human  investigation.  Of  these,  therefore, 
we  are  no  judges;  yet  the  existence  of  them  is 
recognized  in  itself  to  be  necessary  by  the  limits 
of  our  natural  knowledge. 

S  11.  Nor  is  the  growing  conviction  that  Reli- ,Natural 

J  00  laws  not  in- 

gion  itself  falls  within  a  natural  order,  and  may  to  compatible 

f  J  with  the 

a  certain  extent  be  treated  as  a  positive  phenome-  historical 
non,  determined  by  the  mental  faculties  and  the  of  reii- 
history  of  their  development,  any  real  stumbling-  S 
block  to  the  acceptance  of  the  Christian  faith. 

The  criticism  of  some  modern  schools  of  thought,2 * 


1  “  It  is  an  error  to  suppose  Mysticism  as  the  perpetual  antagonist  of 
Scholasticism ;  the  Mystics  were  often  severe  logicians  :  the  Scholastics 
had  all  the  passions  of  Mystics.” — Milman,  Lat.  Christ .,  VI.  263.  See 
Gieseler,  III.  292,  and  IV.  188,  E.  T.,  ed.  Clark.  Lacordaire  speaks  of 
“  la  certitude  mystique  et  translumineuse.”  In  all  Mysticism  we  must 
distinguish  between  an  intellectual  and  an  ethical  tendency.  Comp. 
Dorner,  Hist.  Prot.  Th.,  I.  52.  There  is  a  tendency  in  Mysticism 
towards  what  has  been  termed  Monopsychism,  the  belief  in  the  mere 
existence  of  a  single  soul.  Such  a  view  is  the  correlative  of  pure 
Materialism. 

2  See  Mr.  Farrar,  Witness  of  History  to  Christ ,  p.  61,  and  Dr.  Farrar, 

Critical  Hist,  of  Free  Thought ,  pp.  122,  392.  Comp.  Hegel,  Phil.  d. 


144 


When  the 
facts  are 
allowed 
or. 


Impor¬ 
tance  of 
the  doc¬ 
trine  of  an 
evangeli¬ 
cal  pre¬ 
paration. 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  III. 

commencing  witli  Lessing  and  culminating  in  Baur, 
grows  out  of  this  truth  pursued  into  excess.  On 
the  Positivist  theory  Christianity  is  the  necessary 
result  of  previous  antecedents.  It  could  not  but 
have  arisen  out  of  the  contact  of  Jewish  Monotheism 
and  Greek  speculation  and  Roman  Empire.1  This 
explanation  (even  if  true  of  a  system  of  dogmas) 
does  not,  as  we  have  already  seen,  account  for  an 
historic  Gospel,  that  is,  for  the  series  of  facts  on 
which  Christian  dogmas  depend.  But  the  still 
larger  fact  that  the  announcement  of  the  religion 
of  Christ  was  in  accordance  with  the  spirit  and 
antecedents  of  its  time,  the  culmination  of  an 
Evangelical  Preparation;2  and  further,  that  in  its 
history  it  has  followed  the  course  of  laws  unre¬ 
servedly  accepted  in  other  departments  of  know¬ 
ledge  and  action,  this  result  should  be  a  confirma¬ 
tion,  not  an  arraignment,  of  its  truth.  It  is  no 
tenet  of  the  Christian  faith  to  deny  that  we  are  the 
“  heirs  of  all  the  ages,”  or,  in  the  expressive  words 
of  Comte,  that  “  we  who  live  are  ruled  by  the 
dead.”  The  continuity  and  solidarity  of  human 

Gesch.  3.  Theil,  III.  ii.  Mr.  Buckle,  Bist.  Civ.,  II.  21,  attributes  the 
first  notion  of  a  theory  of  religious  development  to  the  French  writer, 
Charron. 

1  See  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  V.  349,  and  Prof.  Westcott’s  just  remarks 
( Comte  on  Christianity),  Cont.  Pev.,  VI.  404.  Dr.  Dorner,  Hist.  Prot. 
Th .,  II.  291,  traces  this  view  to  Eberhard  in  his  Geist  des  Ur-Chris- 
tenthums,  published  in  1807. 

2  On  this  grand  theory  of  Christian  development,  the  contribution  of 
the  School  of  Alexandria  to  a  history  of  doctrine,  see  Neander,  Ch. 
Hist.,  II.  275,  E.  T.,  ed.  Clark. 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


145 


history  are  ideas  which  lie  at  the  root  of  the 
doctrines  of  Christ.  Time  has  been  when,  through 
an  unconscious  lack  of  faith  in  the  ordinary  pro¬ 
vidence  of  God,  the  progress  of  Christianity  has 
been  too  largely  assigned  to  miraculous  and  super¬ 


natural  causes.1  It  was  narrowed  accordingly  to 
false  or  unimportant  issues.  The  humbler,  if  safer,  Thissome- 

i  r  l  it  , .  times  lost 

road  ol  regular  and  ordinary  causation  was  deemed  sight  of. 
unmeet  for  it.  The  presence  of  the  Divine  message 
and  its  efficacy  were  hailed  more  readily  in  the 
rending  earthquake  and  the  great  strong  wind,  and 
in  the  devouring  fire,  than  in  the  still  small  voice 
of  moral  conviction  and  spiritual  transformation, 
borne  slowly  down  the  stream  of  time.2  But  nOW  Present 

.  tendency 

men  think  and  see  differently,  and  looking  back  of  the  age. 
we  seem  to  catch  the  breath  of  a  Divine  mystery, 
mingling  ever  silently  with  the  voices  and  tones  of 
men,  and  tempering  with  a  heavenly  calm  the 
fevered  spirit  of  the  age.3  It  is  not  now  argued 
that  the  rise  and  progress  of  Christianity  are 
inexplicable :  but  rather  that  its  results  prove 


1  See  some  good  remarks  of  Dean  Merivale,  Conversion  of  Empire , 
p.  20.  “  The  human  mind  continued  to  work  by  its  old  accustomed 
methods;  but  those  methods  of  thought  were  themselves  of  God’s 
original  appointment.  The  Holy  Spirit  had  brooded  over  their  creation, 
and  guided  them  gently  to  the  end  which  to  Him  was  present  from  the 
beginning.  Also  Northern  Nations ,  pp.  x.  103 ;  and  Dorner’s  remarks 
on  Lessing,  Hist.  Prot.  Th .,  II.  303. 

2  See  Mr.  Lecky,  Hist.  Eur.  M.,  I.  412. 

Perhaps,  says  Laud,  Conf.  p.  xxiii.,  “there  may  be  in  voce 
hominum  tuba  Dei  in  the  still  voice  of  men  the  loud  trumpet  of  God 
which  sounds  many  ways,  sometimes  to  the  ears  and  sometimes  to  the 
hearts  of  men,  and  by  means  which  they  think  not  of.” 


Relation 
of  intel- 


146  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  III. 

its  permanent  and  catholic  character ;  that  it  is  a 
religion  to  take  part  and  co-exist  with  advancing 
civilization. 

§  12.  Thus,  in  an  estimate  of  the  value  of  Chris- 
lectual  tianity  as  a  permanent  element  in  human  progress, 
dvXa-S  ‘°  some  preliminary  inquiry  into  the  relation  of  in- 
tl0n’  tellectual  conditions  towards  advance  in  morals  and 
religion  must  come  in.  So  long  as  it  is  maintained 
that  all  advance  is  really  intellectual,1  and  that 
knowledge  and  civilization  tend  rather  to  the 
extinction  than  to  the  promotion  of  religious  senti¬ 
ment,  the  situation  of  Christianity,  equally  indeed 
with  all  creeds,  becomes  precarious  and  doubtful. 
Its  impor-  -^rpat  then,  is  meant  in  such  discussions  by  civiliza- 
the  fact  of  -^0n  ?  Not,  surely,  one  thing,  but  many  ;  not  a 

the  per-  #  „  T  •  T 

manence  simple,  but  a  highly  complex  tact.  It  is,  1  appre- 
tianity.  hend,  the  position  or  degree  of  education  of  the 
human  race  at  any  given  period,  in  respect  not  of 

Definition  knowledge  only,  but  of  social  and  political  condi- 
of^cmhza-  tioi^  depencient  on  circumstances  of  race,  climate, 

and  other  special  antecedents ;  further,  also,  in 
respect  of  moral  and  religious  beliefs,  acting  con¬ 
jointly  with  art  and  assthetical  development.2  All 


1  See  Mr.  Buckle,  Hist.  Civ.,  I.  c.  iv.  (more  especially  p.  182).  His  argu¬ 
ment  is  that  civilization  is  indeed  the  product  of  moral  and  intellectual 
agencies ;  but  that  as  morality  is  really  stationary  and  without  advance, 
the  intellect  is  the  prime  mover  and  is  permanent  in  its  results.  In 
II.  89,  he  seems  after  Descartes  to  ground  religion  itself  on  an  idea 
of  the  intellect.  See,  on  the  other  hand,  Mr.  Lecky,  Hist.  Eur.  M., 
I.  105,  156,  &c. 

2  See  Mill’s  Logic ,  Bk.  VI.,  x.  2.  “  What  is  called  a  state  of  society  is 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


14  7 


these  elements  may  be  present  in  a  varying  relation 
and  in  different  proportions  of  force.  All  may 
together  be  acting  feebly  ;  some  vigorously,  some  a  complex 
scarcely.  Industrial  and  intellectual  culture  by  no  many  fac- 
means  advances  uniformly  in  all  its  branches.  Itto  s’ 
may,  as  in  Ancient  Greece,  be  far  ahead  of  other 
elements  of  true  culture,  and  be  before  its  time.1 
Knowledge  may  be  at  a  low  ebb  in  a  community 
where  religious  convictions  have  a  strong  hold  upon 
the  hearts  and  affections  of  a  people.  Morality  including 
may  be  weakest  in  respect  of  the  conduct  of  the  rellglon' 
masses,  while  knowledge  flourishes,  and  a  spirit  of 
inquiry  is  widely  diffused.  Such  a  result  tends 
directly  against  true  culture.  The  conditions  of 
intellectual  are  not  generally  favourable  to  moral 
growth.2  Meanwhile,  the  political  circumstances 
may  be  auspicious  or  unfavourable,  while  the  social 
condition  of  a  nation  will  exhibit  the  complex  result 


the  simultaneous  state  of  all  the  greater  social  facts  or  phenomena  .  .  . 
the  common  beliefs  entertained  on  all  the  subjects  most  important  to 
mankind,  and  the  degree  of  assurance  with  which  those  beliefs  are  held,” 
&c.  So  also  Guizot  ( Civil .  en  France,  Lee.  i.,  p.  273),  “It  is  not  these 
two  principles  of  themselves,  which  constitute  civilization  :  to  bring  it 
to  perfection,  their  intimate  and  rapid  union,  simultaneousness,  and 
reciprocal  action  are  absolutely  necessary.”  See  the  whole  of  the 
passage.  Comp,  also  Grant’s  Bamp.  Lect. ,  p.  308.  Mr.  Tylor  {Hist. 
Prim.  Cult.,  I.  p.  1)  thus  defines:  “Culture  or  civilization  taken  in  its 
wide  ethnographic  sense  is  that  complex  whole  which  includes  know- 
ledge,  belief,  art,  morals,  law,  custom,  and  any  other  capabilities  and 
habits  acquired  by  man  as  a  member  of  society.” 

1  See  Mr.  Tylor,  u.  s.,  I.  24.  Comp.  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  V.  252,  257. 

2  See  Guizot,  Civ.  en  France,  I.  348 :  “  When  the  social  relations 
have  been  described,  are  the  facts  whose  aggregate  constitutes  the  life 
of  an  epoch  exhausted  ?  Certainly  not ;  there  remains  to  be  studied  the 

L  2 


148 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  III. 


Ancient 

distin¬ 

guished 

from 

modern 

civiliza¬ 

tion. 


Expansion 
of  the 
religious 
sentiment. 


of  the  other  elements  of  its  civilization.  Hence 
the  differences  of  ancient  and  modern  culture. 
They  are  not  only  distinct  stages  of  a  common 
progress  or  development,  to  which  man’s  nature 
points  and  tends.1  They  have  proceeded  from 
different  principles.  Ancient  civilization  started 
from  one  alone,  as  in  Athens  from  intellectual  cul¬ 
ture,  in  Rome  from  the  principle  of  public  utility, 
the  submission  of  individual  development  to  com¬ 
mon  good,  the  recognition  and  creation  of  law. 
Then,  rapidly  advancing,  it  became  soon  exhausted 
and  monotonous.  In  modern  times,  civilization  is 
with  more  reason  held  dependent  on  the  due  dis¬ 
position  of  all  the  various  powers  of  human  nature 
under  social  forms.  The  soul  of  man  has  ac¬ 
cordingly  been  stirred  upon  a  larger  number  of 
points  and  to  a  greater  depth.  It  has  become  more 
accessible  to  the  power  of  new  ideas.  In  this  result 
the  amelioration  of  social  conditions  has,  no  doubt, 
reacted  on  humanity.  And  it  may  well  be  that, 
as  man’s  nature  and  knowledge  rise  with  culture, 
his  religious  sentiment  also  alters  and  expands. 
But,  inversely,  Christianity  by  first  changing  and 
regenerating  human  nature,  has  developed  morally, 

internal,  the  personal  state  of  men,  the  state  of  souls ;  that  is,  on  one 
side  the  ideas,  doctrines,  the  whole  intellectual  life  of  man :  on  the  other, 
the  relations  which  connect  ideas  with  actions,  creeds  with  the  determina¬ 
tions  of  the  will,  thought  with  human  liberty.”  In  II.  395  he  blames 
Bossuet  for  having  confined  his  view  of  civilization  to  religious  creeds, 
and  Montesquieu  to  political  institutions. 

1  See  Tylor,  u.  s.,  I.  25. 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


149 


and  even  intellectually,  tlie  individual  man  without 
necessarily  varying  his  external  condition.  But 
this  change  did  not  come  at  once ;  and  under  the 
later  Empire  the  world  retrograded  in  its  intellectual 
stage  while  in  possession  of  Christian  ideas.  For 
“  advanced  ideas,”  it  has  been  truly  said,1  “  when 
once  established,  act  upon  society  and  aid  its  further 
advance.  Yet  the  establishment  of  such  ideas 
depends  on  the  previous  fitness  of  society  for  re¬ 
ceiving  them.”  There  must  be  a  thorough  corre¬ 
spondence  of  external  and  internal  relations.  The  Cnuiiza- 

J-  #  #  tion  must 

religion  of  our  present  so-called  civilization,  if  it  he  be  as  wide 
only  or  mainly  an  evolution  of  intellect,  ignoring  whole 

J  J  !r  nature  of 

the  claims  of  conscience,  can  hut  exhibit  a  one-sided,  man. 
imperfect  progress  ;2  it  does  not  fulfil  the  idea,  and 
must  fail,  as  it  has  failed  of  old.  Such,  however, 
is  not  the  character  of  the  religion  of  Christ,  which 
is,  therefore,  “  established  on  better  promises  ”  of 
permanence  and  progress.  But  on  what  grounds  Religion  a 

1  0  .  .  part  cause 

is  it  asserted  that  all  human  advance  is  intellectual,  of  pro- 

•  gress. 

thus  necessitating  the  conclusion  that  Christianity 
is  itself  an  effect  and  not  a  cause  of  progress  ? 
Because,3  it  is  answered,  without  external  inter¬ 
ference  people  will  never  discover  their  existing 

1  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer,  Classification  of  Sciences ,  p.  37. 

2  See  Dr.  J.  H.  Newman,  Gramm,  of  Assent,  p.  391 ;  also  Essay  on 
Devel.,  I.  §  3 ;  and  particularly  Dean  Church,  Univ.  Sermons  on  the 
relation  of  Christianity  to  civilization.  “  It  corrects  the  narrowing  ol 
man’s  horizon  ;  which  civilization  cannot  do,  perhaps  fosters.”  “  Chris¬ 
tianity  affords  the  only  means  of  cherishing  purity,”  &c. 

3  Buckle,  Hist.  Civ.,  I.  254. 


150 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  III. 


Reason  of 
this. 


Change  of 
religion 
not  due  to 
an  intel¬ 
lectual 
conviction 
solely  or 
chiefly. 


religion  to  be  a  bad  one ;  and  this  implies  some 
previous  improvement  in  reason  and  knowledge. 
But  has  religion,  it  may  fairly  be  replied,  only  an 
intellectual  side  ?  Is  it  not  so,  as  Pascal  has  said,1 
that  “  the  heart  also  has  its  reasons,  which  reason 
cannot  apprehend”?  “  It  is  necessary  to  imbue 
our  faith  with  feeling,  otherwise  it  will  be  for  ever 
vacillating.”  Has  the  work  of  conversion  been 
always  among  races  so  far  advanced  in  knowledge 
and  mental  resources  as  to  be  adequate  critics,  from 
the  intellectual  stand-point,  of  the  merits  of  a  new 
faith  ?  It  is  conceivable  that  the  belief  of  bar¬ 
barous  times  or  tribes  may  be  in  some  respects 
simpler  and  truer2  than  that  of  periods  of  culture, 
just  as  the  moral  qualities  of  savage  races  some¬ 
times  suffer  at  the  first  impact  of  civilization. 
Again,  is  it,  as  a  matter  of  fact,3  by  intellectual 
convictions  chiefly  or  soiely  that  religions  have 
made  their  way  in  different  regions  of  the  world  ? 
Perhaps  the  simplest  mode  has  been  the  acceptance 
of  the  faith  of  the  conquering  race  by  the  subject 
peoples.  Between  different  forms  of  polytheism 
such  an  interchange  could  not  have  been  difficult.4 

Civilization,  it  has  been  aptly  said,  “  is  a  plant 
much  oftener  propagated  than  developed.”5  This 

1  Pensees ,  II.  176,  I.  155,  ed.  Faugere. 

2  See  Newman,  Gramm,  of  Assent,  p.  391. 

3  See  an  example  in  Mr.  Tylor,  Hist.  Prim.  Cult.,  I.  27. 

4  See  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  V.  180.  Hume,  Nat.  H.  of  Religion ,  §  9. 

6  Tylor,  Hist.  Pr.  C .,  I.  48. 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  151 

has  resulted  either  from  direct  compulsion,  as  by 
the  scimitar  of  Islamism,  or  from  ail  instinct  of 
inferiority  naturally,  and  not  without  reason,1 
accompanying  defeat.  Where  a  new  language  can 
be  imposed,  no  doubt  through  u  the  spiritual  rela¬ 
tionship”  of  races,  religion  may  pass  also.  Yet 
this  is  not  always  so  ;  as,  for  instance,  in  the 
Mahometan  and  British  subjugations  of  Hindostan. 

Nor  is  it  so  generally,  where  a  strong  sacerdotal 
caste  exists  among  the  conquered  race.2  But 
neither,  if  it  were,  could  it  be  traced  to  any  law  of 
rational  superiority  alone  in  the  religion  of  the 
conqueror.  For  then  the  progress  of  religious 
truth,  it  is  to  be  supposed,  would  have  been  simple 
and  continuous  ;  a  result  which  is  not  borne  out 
by  the  history  of  mankind.  Other  circumstances,  Historical 
therefore,  must  be  taken  into  account.  The  this  fact, 
guidance,  or  at  any  rate  the  sequence,  of  events 
introduces  particular  religions  into  the  world  and 
into  distinct  localities.  Once  received,  from  what¬ 
ever  causes,  they  flourish  and  endure  according  to 
the  amount  of  truth  which  they  contain,  combined 
with  the  fitness  of  their  doctrines  for  the  special 
circumstances  of  region  and  race,  including,  it  is 
true,  as  one  condition,  a  certain  stage  of  intellectual 

1  Comp.  Arist.,  Pol.,  I.  vi. :  rpoivov  nva  dperr]  rvyxdvovcra  x°Priyia^ 

£ idCeo-Oai  bvvarai  paXurra,  kcu  eanv  del  to  Kparodv  ev  vTvepoXfl  dyadov 
tlvos  dicrre  SoKeiv  prj  dvev  dperr/s  eivai  tt)v  fiiav. 

2  Compare  the  remarks  of  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  V.  241,  and  Sir  John 

Lubbock,  Orig.  of  Civilization. 


152 


General¬ 
ization  of 
the  se¬ 
quence  of 
religious 
concep¬ 
tions. 


Thus, 
Chris¬ 
tianity  an 
agent  in 
civiliza¬ 
tion, 

whence  an 
argument 
arises  for 
its  per¬ 
manence. 


To  be 
shown  in 
detail. 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  III. 

advance.  Thus  fetishism  may  be  found  to  precede 
polytheism,  polytheism  the  belief  in  one  Grod.1 
And  thus  even  a  large  admixture  of  error  is  long 
able  to  maintain  its  ground  by  appealing  to  some 
of  all  the  religious  instincts  of  mankind,  until,  by 
the  will  of  Grod,  the  hour  arrives  for  its  supersession 
by  a  higher  and  purer  faith. 

§  13.  Were  it  unquestionable  that  the  benefits 
attributed  to  the  Religion  of  Christ  are  the  results 
of  social  laws  alone,  or  of  some  foregoing  intel¬ 
lectual  stage  of  civilization,  or  again,  that  Religion, 
apart  from  moral  teaching,  has  no  proper  and 
special  field  of  action,  it  would  be  plainly  futile  to 
argue  from  the  effects  of  Christianity  to  its  perma¬ 
nence  and  truth  as  a  religious  system.  It  is  thus 
made ‘answerable  for  all  its  defects  in  operation, 
for  those  evils,  mischiefs,  and  shortcomings  which 
a  narrow  philosophy  has  always  too  readily  set 
down  to  its  account,  while  it  is  allowed  no  share 
in  the  amelioration  of  man’s  estate,  no  force  in  the 
influences  which  have  determined  the  advancement 
of  the  race.  I  shall  therefore  attempt  to  show  that 
the  progress  of  civilization  has  been  in  successive 
ages  largely  promoted  by  the  character  and  distinc- 

1  As  held  by  Hume,  Essays ,  Nat.  Hist  of  Eel.  Comte,  Phil.  Pos ., 
V.  40,  46;  Grote,  Hist,  of  Greece,  I.  462,  V.  22  ;  Buckle,  I.  251;  and' 
Mr.  lyloi,  with  some  modifications.  Mr.  Mill,  Examination ,  p.  307, 
lemaiks  pio.oundly  that  the  psychological  rationale  of  this  vast  gene¬ 
ralization  is  the  historical  development  oi  the  subjective  notion  of  power. 
Augustine,  0  iv.  1).,  1\  .  xi.,  strives  to  represent  polytheism  as  a  thinly 
disguised  monotheism. 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


153 


tive  tenets  of  the  Gospel,  and  these  not  of  an  intel-  Prelimi*  . 

Jl  7  nary  consi- 

lectual  cast.  The  philosophy  of  history  points  de-  derations, 
finitely  to  an  improvement  in  human  affairs,  an 
improvement  with  which  Christianity  is  in  accord, 
and  of  which  it  has  formed  a  part.  In  the  next *•  The 

^  #  relation  or 

Lecture,  however,  in  order  to  answer  certain  obiec-  religion  to 
tions  still  met  with  against  the  originality  and  moral  sys- 

.  .  terns.  (See 

importance  of  the  Faith  of  Christ,  it  will  be  neces-  Lecture 
sary  to  determine  within  fixed  limits  the  connec¬ 
tion  and  interdependence  of  Religion  with  merely 
moral  systems,  and  to  deduce  the  fair  scope  of  the 
former  as  a  distinct  agent  in  the  formation  of 
human  conduct.  One  further  preliminary  consi¬ 
deration  affecting  the  conditions  of  progressive 
civilization  will  then  remain.  Is  there  any  such  2c’Q^t[_ 
inherent  internecine  antagonism  between  Science  ^tdLctuai 
and  Revelation,  the  advance  of  knowledge  and  the 
spread  of  Christianity,  as  on  this  ground  alone  to  Perma- 

1  4/7  ^  s  nence  and 

necessitate  or  foreshadow  the  collapse  of  religious  advance 

of  Chns- 

belief?  Are  we  indeed  entered  upon  an  era  oftianity. 

.  .  (See  Lec- 

scientific  attainments  in  which  theological  faith,  tureV.) 
already  in  some  quarters  subordinated  to  meta¬ 
physical  abstractions,  is  to  be  trodden  under  foot 
by  a  positive  philosophy,  that  is,  by  a  belief  in 
concrete  laws  ?  Is  there  to  be  an  endless  war 
between  our  intellectual  faculties  and  our  religious 
obligations  ?  Are  we  entitled  to  predict  the  de¬ 
cline  and  extinction  of  all  theologies,  as  a  gradual 
but  inevitable  consequence  of  the  course  of  human 


154 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  III. 


Religion  affairs  ?  Must  we  look  forward  to  a  time  when  the 

attacked  as  . 

unservice-  inutility  and  helplessness  of  all  religious  sentiment 

inefficient,  to  advance  the  well-being  of  mankind  will  be  uni¬ 
versally  admitted  ?  And  here  it  may  be  at  once 
allowed  that  the  sphere  of  Religion,  whatever  be  its 
true  work  and  office  in  respect  of  the  positive 
benefits  which  it  confers  upon  mankind,  lies  wholly 
outside  Science.  It  was  not  sent  to  redress  evils 
which  it  is  the  province  of  knowledge  to  remove. 
But  is  it  always  kept  in  mind,  when  Christianity  is 
thus  assailed  on  the  score  of  inefficiency,  how  small 
a  part  of  those  ills  which  “  flesh  is  heir  to,”  Science 

Criticism  itself  has  hitherto  availed  to  abolish  ?  While  con- 

oi  the  ser¬ 
vices  ren-  ferring  on  mankind  large  benefits  and  grand  op- 

dered  by  #  J  °  1 

positive  portunities,  can  it  be  said  of  this  new  divinity  that 

knowledge  7  .  .  J 

to  man-  it  alone  brings  no  evils  m  its  train  P1  The  mecha¬ 
nical  skill  which  stimulates  as  it  facilitates  produc¬ 
tion,  the  mighty  powers  of  locomotion  by  which 
the  fabrics  of  commerce  are  made  to  traverse  the 
furthest  regions  of  the  earth,  the  progress  which  is 
making  in  the  labours  of  the  factory  and  of  the 
mill — have  they  hitherto  increased  the  sum  of 
happiness  and  individual  comfort  for  those  vast 
human  masses,  the  slaves  of  the  mine  and  of  the 
loom,  which  have,  as  it  were,  leaped  into  being  at 
the  call  of  science  ?  When  I  walk  through  our  vast 

1  Mr.  Lecky,  Hist.  Ear.  Mor .,  I.  132,  lias  some  just  and  profound 
reflections  on  the  tendency  of  industrial  progress  to  sacrifice  moral 
dignity  and  elevation  of  character,  and  on  its  relation  to  a  utilitarian 
standard  in  morals. 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


155 


manufacturing  capitals,  and  gaze  on  the  squalid 
tenements,  the  swarming  alleys,  the  sordid,  care¬ 
worn  faces  which  meet  the  view,  I  cannot  but  ask 
myself  if  this  is  indeed  the  end  of  all  their  being — 
whether  the  increase  of  wealth,  of  population  and 
production,  it  these  be  its  conditions,  can  be  worth 
its  own  accomplishment ;  whether  the  struggle  for 
existence  does  not  outweigh  the  blessing,  or  rather 
the  very  reasons  of  life.1  Is  the  elevation  of  the 
many  a  true  consequence  of  the  increase  of  wealth  ? 

Is  it  not  as  in  the  days  of  old  ?  “  When  goods  Is  increase 

.  J  0  of  produc- 

mcrease  they  are  increased  that  eat  them.”2  “It  tion  or 

*  ,  .  material 

is  a  sore  travail  which  God  has  given  to  the  sons  progress 

tan ta* 

of  men  to  exercise  them.”  “All  things  are  full  of  mount  to 
labour;  that  which  is  crooked  cannot  be  made vation ? e 
straight,  and  that  which  is  wanting  cannot  he 
numbered.”  Surely  these  words  of  the  Preacher 
express  a  profound  disappointment  at  the  little 
effect  of  wisdom  and  skilled  knowledge  on  man’s 
physical  and  moral  condition  ?  Are  they  inappli-  Reasons 

.  1  1  for  doubt. 

cable  now  ?  Much,  at  any  rate,  remains  to  be 
done  for  these  toiling  millions  which  as  yet  has 


not  been  done.  Brought  into  the  world  to  eke 
out,  it  would  seem,  the  purposes  of  labour,  they 
live,  they  work,  they  die,  uncheered  by  the  lamp 
of  knowledge,  which  assigns  their  daily  task.  What 
has  Political  Economy,  Ethology,  or  Social  Science3 


1  “  Et  propter  vitam  vivendi  pcrdere  causas.” — Juv. 

2  Eccles.  v.  11 ;  i.  13,  15. 

3  Compare  Dr.  Mozley’s  just  remarks,  Tamp.  Led.,  p.  192. 


156 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  III. 


The  need 
of  the  mo¬ 
tives  and 
consola¬ 
tions  of 
religion 
evident. 


as  yet  done  to  mend  tlieir  lot  or  gild  their  prospect, 
amid  the  gigantic  risks  and  ever-enlarging  perils 
among  which  they  earn  their  bread  ?  Then  in  the 
moment  of  writhing  pain  and  impending  dissolu¬ 
tion,  the  result  of  unprevented  accident,  or  in  the 
long  hours  of  wasting,  incurable  sickness,  the  effect 
of  some  noxious  employment,  to  what  shall  they 
turn  their  dying  eyes  for  consolation,  for  support? 
Will  the  long  vista  of  coming  generations  born 
like  them  to  suffer,  to  struggle,  and  to  die,  yet 
making  up  the  sum  of  that  Humanity,1  that  “  unity 
of  our  race,”  that  “  course  of  evolution,”  that  “  sub¬ 
jective  immortality”  which  to  some  among  us  seems 
the  very  God  of  all  their  worship — will  the  con¬ 
sciousness  of  an  unknown,  unknowable  reality 
underlying  the  world  of  matter  or  of  mind — will 
the  “  infinite  nature  of  duty” — will  these  close 
their  eyes  in  peace  ?  or  will  they  not  rather,  feeling 
themselves  but  denizens  of  a  world  that  passes,  yet 
heirs  of  an  immortal,  immaterial  spirit,  turn  with 
all  their  hearts  towards  a  Faith  which  alone  ex¬ 
plains  the  present  and  guarantees  the  future ; 
which  alone  lends  strength  now  and  gives  assur¬ 
ance  and  peace  for  ever ;  which  teaches,  that 

1  Sec  Strauss,  Der  Alte  and  der  Neue  Qlanbe ,  p.  372  ff.  ;  and 
Mr.  Winwood  Reade,  Martyrdom  of  Man,  pp.  535-7.  I  quote  but  one 
passage :  “  We  teacli  that  the  soul  is  immortal ;  we  teach  that  there  is 
a  future  life ;  we  teach  that  there  is  a  heaven  in  the  ages  far  away  ;  but 
not  for  us  single  corpuscles,  and  for  us  dots  of  animated  jelly;  but  for 
the  One  of  whom  we  arc  the  elements,  and  who,  though  we  perish,  never 
dies.” 


Lect.  III.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


1 57 


though  the  dust  returns  to  the  earth  as  it  was, 
yet  there  is  hope  in  man’s  latter  end  ?  For  the 
spirit  shall  return  unto  God  Who  gave  it,  yea,  and 
Who  hath  redeemed  it  from  sin  unto  Himself.  For 
“if  in  this  life  only  we  have  hope,  what  advantageth 
it  ?”  Let  us  eat  and  drink,  for  to-morrow  we  die. 
“  But  now  is  Christ  risen  from  the  dead,  and  He  is 
become  the  first-fruits  of  them  that  sleep.” 


LECTURE  IV. 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

CONSIDERED. 


“  C’est  mal  raisonner  contre  la  religion  de  rassembler  dans  un  grand 
ouvrage  line  longue  enumeration  des  maux  qu’elle  a  produits,  si  Ton  no 
fait  de  merne  celle  des  biens  qu’elle  a  faits.” — Montesquieu,  Esprit  des 
Lois,  xxiv.,  ii. 


LECTURE  IV. 


“  Not  after  the  law  of  a  carnal  commandment ,  but  after  the 
power  of  an  endless  life Dit,  16. 


§  i.  r  I  AIIE  many  forms  of  Religion  which  have  Religion 
played  their  part  on  the  stage  of  the  a  mode  of 
world’s  history,  have  sometimes  been  held  to  be  ingnmra"- 
but  different  modes  of  proclaiming  the  same  moral llty’ 
truths.1  It  is  these  which  are  regarded  as  the 
true  salt  of  society,  the  ever-resumed  heritage  of 
the  whole  human  race.  “  All  religions,”  said 
Diderot,  66  are  but  the  sects  of  the  one  Religion 
of  Nature.”  I  do  not  now  stay  to  inquire  what 
such  a  religion  is ;  whether  altogether  reasoned 
out,  or  itself  the  gift  of  a  primary  revelation : 
whether  it  exists;  whether  it  corresponds  to  the 
actual  beliefs  of  the  lower  races  ;  whether  it  could  Relation 

i  -i  of  Chris- 

ever  become  adequate  to  the  moral  wants  of  man-  tianity  to  a 
kind ;  whether  it  be  not  Christian  morality  with  of  Nature, 
the  omission  of  all  that  is  Christian,  with  its  proofs 

1  See  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  IV.  77.  The  teaching  of  the  School  of  Kant 
regards  ecclesiastical  beliefs  as  the  vehicle  for  conveying  truths  of  pure, 
i.  e.  natural,  religion.  See  Mr.  Lecky’s  remarks,  Ilist.  Fiat .,  I.  329. 

Compare  H.  J.  Rose,  Hist .  Prot.  in  Germany ,  p.  143.  Its  effect,  as 
Dr.  Farrar,  B.  L p.  323,  has  tersely  remarked,  is  “  to  destroy  Revelation 
by  leaving  nothing  to  be  revealed.”  The  Gospel  thus  only  makes 
legible  the  eternal  Law  of  Nature  written  in  the  heart. 

M 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV. 


162 


drawn  from  reason,  and  not  from  Revelation. 
What  hinders,  however,  that  such  a  religion, 
acknowledging,  as  it  needs  must,  from  the  side 
of  experience  a  sense  of  sin,  even  points  to  a 
remedy  which  is  found  only  in  the  revelation  of 
a  Mediator  P1  Such  a  fact,  then,  and  the  system  of 
which  it  is  a  part,  does  not  supersede  or  contra- 
supple-  diet  the  instincts  of  Natural  Religion.  It  rather 
contra-’  completes  and  supplements  them,  and  shows  the 
dictoiy.  Q}iristjan  faith  to  be  itself  in  a  manner  natural. 

The  objection,  however,  implied  is  really  this : 
that  Christianity,  while  no  doubt  “  as  old  as  the 
implied  creation,”  is  unfortunately  also  no  newer.  It  is 

objection  ..  . 

against  the  no  more  than  a  re-publication  of  the  Religion  of 
and  useful-  Nature.  For  the  principles  of  morality,  it  is 

ness  of  .  , .  .. 

religion.  implied, 

of  enlargement  or  multiplication.  Obscured  they 
may  have  been  from  time  to  time  in  the  progress 
of  ages  and  by  the  circumstances  of  mankind. 
But  positive  religions,  while  they  have  done  much 
to  impede  the  recognition  of  these  principles,  have 


are  in  effect  few  and  simple,  incapable 


1  “  The  matter  of  Revelation  is  not  a  mere  collection  of  truths,  not  a 
philosophical  view,  not  a  religious  sentiment  or  spirit,  not  a  special 
morality  poured  out  upon  mankind  as  a  stream  might  pour  itself  into 
the  sea,  mixing  with  the  world’s  thought,  modifying,  purifying,  invi¬ 
gorating  it ;  but  an  authoritative  teaching,  .  .  a  religion  in  addition  to 
the  religion  of  nature,  not  superseding  or  contradicting  it.” — I.  H.  New¬ 
man,  Gramm,  of  Assent ,  pp.  382,  479.  See  Dr.  Mozley  in  Cont.  Rev ., 
VII.  On  the  relation  of  Christianity  to  natural  religion,  see  Chal¬ 
mers,  Bridg.  Tr .,  sub  finem.  He  concludes :  “  Natural  theology  has 
been  called  the  basis  of  Christianity :  it  were  better  called  the  basis  of 
Christianization.” 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  163 


succeeded  but  poorly  in  exhibiting  their  truth, 
or  in  facilitating  their  reception. 

§  2.  The  error  in  these  assumptions  seems  to  Error  in 

-L  this 

lie  in  the  supposition  that  all  the  particulars  ofassump- 
moral  truth  have  been  from  the  first  well  known  tl°n* 
and  understood  :  or  that  they  are  in  their  own 
nature  incapable  of  further  development.  Some 
who  have  justly  seen  that  morality  has  really 
been  progressive,  have  preferred  to  attribute  the 
result  to  improved  knowledge  rather  than  to  the 
influence  of  religious  ideas.  Can  it,  however,  be  Morality 
sei lously  maintained,  with  any  show  of  reason,  gressive. 
that  the  whole  aspect  of  moral  truths  in  the 
history  of  our  race  has  been  stationary?  that 
there  is  really  nothing  to  be  found  in  the  world 
which  has  undergone  so  little  change  as  those 
great  dogmas  of  which  moral  systems  are  com¬ 
posed  ; 1  or  again,  to  use  the  words  of  a  powerful 
though  hasty  objector,  that  “  to  assert  that  Chris¬ 
tianity  communicated  to  man  moral  truths  pre¬ 
viously  unknown,  argues,  on  the  part  of  the  as- 
sertor,  either  gross  ignorance  or  else  wilful  fraud.” 

“  All  the  great  moral  systems,”  he  adds,2  “  which 
have  exercised  much  influence  have  been  fundamen¬ 
tally  the  same :  all  the  great  intellectual  systems 
have  been  fundamentally  different.”  So,  then,  all 

1  Buckle,  Hist.  Civ .,  I.  180,  who  adduces  Kant’s  authority  to  the 
same  effect.  See,  however,  Lange’s  counter-criticism,  Gesch.  des  Mate- 
rialismus,  pp.  511,  512. 

2  Buckle,  u.  s.,  p.  181. 

M  2 


164 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV. 


moral  systems  are  substantially  tlie  same : 1  and 
thus  far  all  religions  embodying  and  enshrining  a 
system  of  morals.  Such  would,  no  doubt,  be  the  case, 
if  Religion  contained  nothing  beyond  morality; 
or  if  the  number  of  primary  moral  truths  can  be 
shown  to  be  extremely  small,  and  their  applica¬ 
tion  in  the  form  of  duties  simple  and  obvious. 
Andsys-  Rut,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  is  no  difference  dis- 

tems  of  re¬ 
ligion  vary  cernible  in  the  moral  value  of  separate  religions, 

moral  of  Christianity  as  compared  with  Paganism,  or  of 
Oriental  systems  as  compared  with  one  another  ? 
Are  we,  then,  still  to  be  told  that  the  morals  of 
all  nations  have  been  the  same,  if  not  as  a  matter 
of  practice,  and  in  the  diffusion  of  effects,  yet  in 
principle  and  substance;  that  no  improvements 
have  been  made  in  morality  for  at  least  three 
thousand  years;  and  that  it  admits  of  no  dis¬ 
coveries  ? 2 

Twofold  §  3.  Such  objections,  containing  an  implicit 
thtfpart of  criticism  of  Revelation,  allow,  so  far  as  we  are 
Revelation,  concerned  with  them,  of  a  double  answer.  One, 
that  Religion,  recognizing  and  addressing  the 
spiritual  part  of  man,  influences  and  enlarges 
thereby  his  stock  of  moral  truth,  supplying  new 
motives  of  action  on  the  utilitarian  side,  new 


1  Mr.  Lecky,  Ilist.  Eur.  Mor.,  I.  103-114,  has  ably  shown  that  the 
unity  of  morals  in  different  ages  is  a  unity  not  of  standard,  hut  of 
tendency.  In  the  same  work  (I.  156,  165)  he  argues  directly  against 
Mr.  Buckle’s  theory  on  this  subject. 

2  See  Sir  James  Mackintosh  ap.  Buckle,  I.  181.  The  title  of  his 
work  is,  ‘  A  Dissertation  on  the  Progress  of  Ethical  Philosophy.’ 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


sanctions  and  grounds  of  duty  in  each  fresh  revela¬ 
tion  of  our  relations  with  God  and  man.1  A  test 
is  thus  supplied  which  distinguishes  the  higher 
from  the  lower  religions  of  the  earth,  and  still 
leaves  the  Faith  of  Christ  the  foremost  in  the 
history  of  civilization.  Religion  further  sys¬ 
tematizes  moral  truths  already  recognized  by 
concentrating  them  into  one  focus  of  new  unsus¬ 
pected  light.  Can  the  doctrine  of  the  brotherhood 
of  mankind,  for  example,  be  considered  to  stand 
on  the  same  footing  now  as  before  the  revelation 
of  Jesus  Christ  ?  Does  the  duty  of  love  to  God 
remain  the  same  ?  True  religion,  says  Pascal, 
must  have  for  a  credential  the  obligation  of  loving 
God.  Yet  what  religion  except  our  own  has 
included  this  among  its  ordinances?2  Another 
answer  (on  which  I  shall  not  dwell  at  length) 
is  that  in  the  application  of  the  rules  of  known 
ethical  systems  there  is  an  indefinite  field  of 
extension,  one  strictly  analogous  to  the  growth  of 
knowledge  in  other  subjects.  In  this  direction 
the  history  and  character  of  Christian  teaching, 
not  to  speak  of  its  positive  institutions,  has  had 
a  marked  and  lasting  influence.  It  is  unnecessary 


From  its 
contents  as 
influenc¬ 
ing  and 
advancing 
morals, 


1  Compare  Butler’s  Analogy ,  Pt.  II.  c.  i.,  where  he  argues  for  the 
importance  of  Christianity  as  a  distinct  publication  of  natural  morality, 
containing  relations  which  produce  new  obligations  not  dependent  on 
the  method  of  revelation. 

2  “  La  vraie  religion  doit  avoir  pour  marque  d’obliger  a  aimer  son 
Lieu.  Cela  est  bien  juste :  et  cependant  aucune  autre  que  la  notre  ne 
l’a  ordonne.  La  notre  l’a  fait.” — Pensees ,  Art.  III. 


and  from 
the  his¬ 
torical  pro¬ 
gress  made 
during  the 
Christian 
era. 


Mode  of 
advance. 


100  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV. 

to  insist  on  the  importance  of  casuistry  as  a 
department  of  moral  science,  or  on  the  contribu¬ 
tions  which  have  been  furnished  to  it  by  Christian 
theologians. 1  Still  wider  is  the  field  thus  opened 
when  it  is  considered  that  the  analysis  of  the 
circumstances  of  acts  leads  up  to  a  revision  and 
re-arrangement  of  already-known  principles  of 
duty.  Man  s  moral  and  spiritual  experience  en¬ 
larges  with  his  history.  Mew  grounds  of  practice 
are  brought  to  light,  as  the  action  is  referred  to 
different  reasons  of  rightness  or  wrongness.  In 
this  manner  new  moral  conceptions,  new  theories 
of  conduct,  fresh  central  principles  of  action,  new 
standards  of  merit,  and  of  the  relative  value  of 
particular  virtues,  even  new  faculties,2  are  so  far 
from  being  impossible  of  discovery,  that  they  both 
in  fact  exist,  and  are  continually  recognized  in 
the  growth  of  culture,  illustrating  the  whole 

1  On  this  subject  see  De  Quincey,  Works ,  Vol.  XIV.  pp.  22,  24,  69  ; 
also  some  careful  and  just  remarks  by  Mr.  Morley,  Crit.  Jffsc./p p/351* 
364.  Sii  H.  Maine,  Ancient  Law ,  c.  ix.,  too  readily  condemns  casuistry 
as  a  species  of  moral  theology,  having  its  origin  in  the  distinction  of 
mortal  and  venial  sins.  If,  indeed,  we  adopt  his  view,  that  moral 
philosophy  is  but  a  compound  of  law  and  meta physic,  we  might  fairly 
doubt  of  the  progressive  capacities  of  ethical  science. 

Thus  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer  holds  that  moral  intuitions  are  the 
results  of  accumulated  experiences  of  utility.  See  Bain,  Mental  and 
Mor. .Sc.,  p.  722.  “  Character,”  says  Prof.  Goldwin  Smith,  “does  not 
remain  the  same :  the  character  of  the  man  is  continually  advancing 
through  life;  and  in  like  manner  the  character  of  the  race  advances 
through  history.”  Study  of  Hist,  p.  37.  Mr.  Mill,  Comte  and  Pos., 
p.  112,  looks  on  Protestantism  as  specially  inculcating  a  distinct  moral 

principle,  involving  the  duty  of  culture  ;  viz.  direct  individual  response 
bility  to  God. 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


167 


region  of  duty.  The  subject  of  morals  as  a 
practical  system  reacts  upon  its  own  scientific 
base ;  and  the  analysis  of  complex  effects  and  of 
compound  agents  observable  in  other  branches 
of  knowledge,  advances  here  also,  and  with  the 
same  results. 

§  4.  But,  it  may  be  said,  the  very  progress  in-  Objection, 
dicated  is  an  intellectual  one,  and  owes  nothing  to  progress  is 
the  influences  of  Religion.  It  may  be  explained  tuli^and 
by  an  invariable  law  of  progress  observable  in  region,10 
human  affairs.  Science  depends  on  improved 
methods  of  research,  on  their  application  to  in¬ 
stances,  on  the  development  of  the  principles 
thus  suggested.  So  also  with  moral  truth.  Ripened 
by  the  circumstances  of  the  time,  including  new 
modes  and  lines  of  thinking  due  to  physical  and 
intellectual  causes,  it  bears  unaccustomed  fruits. 

Miraturque  novas  frondes  et  non  sua  poma. 

The  general  sentiment  of  an  age,  it  is  said,1  is 
really  determined  by  the  intellectual  activity,  and 
indirectly  by  the  positive  institutions  which  be¬ 
long  to  it;  and  moral  dogmas,2  as  well  as  the 

1  See  Mr.  Morley’s  observations  on  the  development  of  morals,  u.  s. 

Mi.  V  allace  Malay .  Avcliip .,  sub  fin.)  holds  that  u  while  civilized 
communities  have  progressed  vastly  beyond  the  savage  state  in  intel¬ 
lectual  achievements,  we  have  not  advanced  equally  in  morals  ...  It 
is  not  too  much  to  say  that  the  mass  of  our  populations  have  not  at  all 
advanced  beyond  the  savage  code  of  morals,  and  have  in  many  cases 
sunk  below  it.  Sii  John  Lubbock’s  researches  lead  him  to  the  exact 
reverse  of  this  opinion.  The  savage,  he  holds,  is  destitute  of  moral 
feeling,  e.  g.  of  remorse.—  Orig.  Civ.,  p.  2G5. 


loo  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV. 

immediate  sense  of  obligation,  advance  along  with 
it.  Where  intellect  stagnates,  morality  is  low. 
In  the  unreasoning  savage  it  may  be  altogether 
lacking.  To  reinstate  or  create  the  reign  of  duty, 
there  must  take  place  a  revival  or  awakening  of 
revival knowledge.  The  result  is  seen  in  new  applica- 
ledge.”  tioos’  and  a  simpier  interpretation  of  moral  prin¬ 
ciples  hitherto  acknowledged.  Thus,  the  sense  of 
duty,  generically  the  same  in  different  ages,  varies 
in  amount,  and  modifies  almost  in  quantity,  the 
shades  of  conduct  over  which  it  is  diffused. 

Reply.  The  answer  to  this  view  lies  in  a  matter  of  fact. 

iectuaiteI"  mong'  the  circumstances  of  an  age,  determining 
comuthn  the  general  sentiment  of  the  time,  can  the  power 

fectedby  and  authority  of  tke  prevailing  Faith  count  for 
vailing'  notlling  ?  If  tlle  opinions  of  a  given  period  are 
faith.  dependent  on  its  intellectual  condition,  has  this 

also  been  altogether  unaffected  by  Religion  ? 
Though  intellect  and.  knowledge  have  their  share 
credness  of in  determining  the  applications  of  a  sense  of  duty, 

religion?  ‘°  the  sacredness  of  that  sense  and  the  sanctions  it 
imposes  are  due  altogether  to  Religion,  and  will 
vary  with  its  purity  and  power.  It  has  become 
fashionable  to  legard  great  eras  m  the  history  of 
our  belief,  the  Reformation  or  the  commencement 
ot  Clmstianity  itself,  as  simple  moral  protests 
ma&nno'i  against  the  corruption  of  the  times.  Such  a  view 
protest^  misunderstands  the  character  of  the  phenomena  it 
seeks  to  explain.  The  Reformation  began,  indeed, 


Lect.  IV.]  PR  OGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  169 


with  a  moral  movement,1 2  exhibited  in  a  mystic 
pietism  opposed  in  its  own  nature  to  doctrinal 
limitations.  Its  subsequent  phases  are  well  known  * 
and  the  difference  in  the  prevailing  moral  sentiment, 
before  and  after  this  vast  doctrinal  revolution,  is 
too  marked  to  be  ignored  or  attributed  to  any  but 
its  true  causes.  How  completely  varied  were  the  Nor  can 
moral  forces  introduced  by  the  doctrines  of  Chris-  ofchrfs^ 
tianity  is  evident  from  the  difficulty  and  slowness  &be 
with  which  its  standard  of  duty  asserted  itself, plamed’ 
failing  in  many  parts  of  the  world  to  become  fairly 
established,  even  when  the  recognition  of  some  of 
its  abstract  dogmas  gave  a  show  of  power  and  pre¬ 
dominance  to  its  position."  It  is  thus  no  valid  though 
objection  to  urge  against  the  truth  or  importance  its  pro¬ 
of  Christianity  that  in  its  operation  it  has  been  §hicain 
constantly  limited  by  ethical  conditions.  So  was  condltlons' 
it  in  the  East  with  the  false,  subtle,  contentious 
natures  of  the  Greek  and  Asiatic.3  Religion  in 


1  For  the  moral  effects  of  the  doctrinal  principles  of  the  Reformation, 
see  Ullmann  (Vol.  I.  p.  10,  E.  T.),  Martenseri,  Christian  Dogmatics , 
p.  26,  E.  T.,  and  on  the  transition  from  the  moral  to  the  doctrinal 
movement,  Gieseler,  V.  216,  E.  T.  On  the  relation  of  the  Mystics  to 
the  Reformation  compare  Milman,  Latin  Christianity ,  VI.  379,  and 
particularly  Dorner,  Person  of  Christ ,  Div.  II.,  Vol.  I.  p.  377,  and  Vol.  II. 
sub  init.,  and  Hist.  Prot.  Th.,  Vol.  I.  p.  51,  E.  T. 

2  So  M.  Comte  views  the  Byzantine  Church  as  an  example  of  the 
impotence  of  dogma,  as  such,  to  rule  mankind.  It  lent  itself,  he  thinks, 
too  much  to  the  side  of  reason.  Dorner,  Hist.  Prot.  Th.,  1.  18,  has 
some  excellent  remarks  on  the  purely  intellectual  character  of  the 
Christianity  of  the  Oriental  Church. 

Cicero  s  verdict  is  well  known  (Z)e  Orat.,  I.  xi.),  “  verbi  enim  contro¬ 
versy  jam  diu  torquet  Gra3culos  homines  contentionis  cupidiores  quam 


Illustra¬ 
tion  from 
Eastern 
Chris¬ 
tianity, 


170 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV. 


Oriental  Christianity  was  represented  mainly  by 
theology  and  the  theological  spirit ;  it  formed  no 
alliance  with  true  morality,  and  the  morals  of  the 
time  were  utterly  debased.  It  was  then  shown 
that  a  compound  made  up  of  asceticism  and  mys¬ 
ticism  may  produce  a  faith  unaccompanied  and 
untempered  by  any  infusion  of  really  Christian 
morality.  Insufficient,  singly,  to  counterbalance 
the  want  of  civilization,  or  to  transmute  all  con¬ 
temporary  error,  had  Christianity  succeeded  in 
taking  full  possession  of  the  world  with  the  ele¬ 
ments  which  then  constituted  it,  it  would  but,  to 

veritatis.”  Hooker,  E.  P.,  V.  iii.  3,  holds  the  chiefest  cause  of  the 
chronic  state  of  schism  in  the  Eastern  Church  “  to  have  lien  in  the  rest¬ 
less  wits  of  the  Grecians,  evermore  proud  of  their  own  curious  and 
subtile  inventions :  which,  when  at  any  time  they  had  contrived,  the 
great  facility  of  their  language  served  them  readily  to  make  all  things 
fair  and  plausible  to  men’s  understanding.”  Hence,  Boileau’s  caustic 
comment  on  the  “  Martyres  d’une  diphtliongue.”  “  Greek  Christianity 
was  insatiably  inquisitive,  speculative ;  confident  in  the  inexhaustible 
copiousness  and  fine  precision  of  its  language,  it  endured  no  limitation 
to  its  curious  investigations.” — Mil  man,  Lat.  Christ .,  I.  2.  Bacon 
(on  the  controversies  of  the  Church)  remarks  on  the  heretics  who 
moved  curious  questions  and  mada  strange  anatomies  of  the  natures  and 
person  of  Christ.  “  Illis  temporibus  ingeniosa  res  fuitesse  Christianum.” 
Mr.  Finlay  ( Byz .  E .,  p.  262)  attributes  these  controversies  to  the  Greek 
language  rather  than  to  the  Hellenic  temper.  “  They  had  their  origin  in 
the  more  profound  religious  ideas  of  the  Oriental  nations,  Syrians, 
Armenians,  Egyptians,  Persians.”  Mr.  Froude  ( Short  Stud .,  p.  98) 
remarks,  “  We  wonder  at  the  failure  of  Christianity,  at  the  small  pro¬ 
gress  which  it  has  made  in  comparison  with  the  brilliancy  of  its  rise. 
But  if  men  had  shown  as  much  fanaticism  in  carrying  into  practice  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount  as  in  disputing  the  least  of  the  thousand  dogmatic 
definitions  which  have  superseded  the  Gospel,  we  should  not  now  be 
lamenting  with  Father  Newman  that  ‘  God’s  control  over  the  world  is 
so  indirect  and  His  action  so  obscure.’  ”  See  Mr.  Buckle,  Hist.  Civ., 
II.  303. 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


171 


use  the  words  of  Montalembert,  have  reproduced 
a  kind  of  Christian  China.1  So  was  it  in  the  West  from  the 
when,  after  centuries  of  power,  Paganism  was  tions  of  the 

.  .  Western 

found  to  have  corrupted  its  teacher  with  the  church, 
taint  of  an  inbred  superstition.  The  fact  was  no 
new  one ;  it  had  been  already  observed  and  com¬ 
mented  on  in  the  days  of  Augustine.2  “  It  was  in 
vain  that  Christianity  had  taught  a  simple  doctrine 
and  enjoined  a  simple  worship.  The  minds  of 
men  were  too  backward  for  so  great  a  step,  and 
required  more  complicated  forms  and  a  more  com¬ 
plicated  belief.”  3  This  has  been  remarked,  I  am 
aware,  to  the  disparagement  of  the  efficacy  of  the 
faith  of  Christ.  It  proves,  at  least,  that  Chris-  The  pro- 

.  .  1  i  n  gress  of 

tianity  was  not  dependent  on  the  existing  standard  Oms- 

in.,  j  tt  •  -I  tianity  due 

01  morals  lor  its  advance,  flow,  in  such  case,  to  the 
were  the  changes,  effected  plainly  through  its  nature  of 
means  in  the  absence  of  knowledge  and  culture,  to  tions, vda 
be  accounted  for  ?  Further,  its  morality  however 
estimated,  was  its  own,  and  its  type  of  character 


1  Monks  of  the  West,  I.  275,  Eng.  Tr. 

2  August,  c.  Fciustum ,  XX.  c.  iv.  “  Sacrificia  eorum  vertistis  in  agapes: 
idola  in  Martyres,  quos  votis  similibus  colitis :  defunctorum  umbras  vino 
placatis  et  dapibus :  solemnes  Gentium  dies  cum  ipsi  celebratis,  ut 
Kalendas  et  solstitia,  de  vita  certe  mutastis  nihil.”  On  the  reaction  of 
Paganism  on  Christianity  in  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries,  see  Beugnot, 
Histoire  de  la  destruction  du  Paganisme,  II.  92,  and  Merivale,  N. 
Nations,  pp.  57-74. 

3  Buckle,  Hist.  Civ.,  I.  259.  Prof.  Tyndall  writes  ( Cont ,  Rev.,  XX. 
766),  “Christianity  varies  with  the  nature  upon  which  it  falls.  The 
faith  that  simply  adds  to  the  folly  and  ferocity  of  one,  is  turned  to 
enduring  sweetness,  holiness,  abounding  charity,  and  self-sacrifice  by 
another.” 


172 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV. 


which  were 
in  advance 
of  the  ex¬ 
isting 
civiliza¬ 
tion, 


and  of 

actual 

practice. 


was  an  advance  upon  the  highest  level  of 
heathenism.  It  presents  a  difference  not  of  de¬ 
gree  merely,  but  of  kind.1  But  Religion,  if  as¬ 
sumed  to  be  the  product  of  Revelation,  may  very 
well  be,  and,  in  fact,  must  he,  in  advance  of 
existing  civilization.  It  was  so  when  the  Hebrews 
accepted  monotheism,  whether  this  he  or  be  not  a 
Semitic  tenet.  It  was  so  when  the  Jews  rejected 
the  teaching  of  the  Gospel.  It  has  been  so  in  the 
development  of  Gentile  Christianity.  But  the 
fact  of  the  distance  between  its  ideal  and  the 
actual,  between  its  code  of  action  and  existing 
practice,  between  Christianity  in  the  abstract  and 
as  displayed  in  history,  “that  rich  treasury  of 
man’s  dishonour ;  ”  between  the  lives  of  men  and 
the  spirit  of  the  Gospel;2  this  difference  must 
surely  be  allowed  for  under  any  system.  It 
is  the  consciousness  of  this  anomaly  in  the  in- 

1  “  Nothing,”  says  Mr.  Lecky,  “  can,  as  I  conceive,  he  more  erroneous 
or  superficial  than  the  reasonings  of  those  who  maintain  that  the  moral 
element  of  Christianity  has  in  it  nothing  distinctive  or  peculiar.” — Hist. 
Eat.,  I.  338.  See  this  subject  continued  in  II.  110. 

2  “  Quid  si  tale  quiddam  est  vera  religio  ?  Quid  si  multitudo  imperi- 
torum  frequentat  ecclesias,  sed  nullum  argumentum  est  ideo  neminem 
illis  mysteriis  factum  esse  perfectum  ?” — August,  de  Util.  Cred.,  c.  vii. 
M.  Guizot,  while  depicting  the  moral  aspect  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
remarks  finally :  “  A  certain  moral  idea  hovers  over  this  rude,  tem¬ 
pestuous  society,  and  attracts  the  regard,  obtains  the  respect  of  men 
whose  life  scarcely  ever  reflects  its  image.  Christianity  must  doubtless 
be  ranked  among  the  number  of  the  principal  causes  of  this  fact.  Its 
precise  characteristic  is  to  inspire  men  with  a  great  moral  ambition,  to 
hold  constantly  before  their  eyes  a  type  infinitely  superior  to  human 
reality  and  to  excite  them  to  reproduce  it.” — Civ.  en  France ,  III.  115, 
ed.  Bohn. 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


1 73 


dividual  which  forms  the  stimulus  of  all  earnest 
souls.  “  As  a  matter  of  fact,  Christianity  has 
probably  done  more  to  quicken  the  affections  of 
mankind,  to  promote  pity,  to  create  a  pure  and 
merciful  ideal  than  any  other  influence  that  has 
ever  acted  on  the  world.”  1  And  yet  the  Inquisi- 
tion  named  itself  with  the  name  of  Christ.  Prin-  historical 

contradic- 

ciples  must  ever  be  of  more  general  account  than  tions 
actions.  The  first  value  of  the  Christian,  as  of 
any,  religion  is  in  the  loftiness  and  purity  of  its 
standard ;  its  secondary  worth  is  in  the  degree  in 
which  this  operates.2  Hence,  the  fallacy  of  an 
appeal  to  periods  when  the  apparent  zeal  in  the 
diffusion  of  religion  is  greater  and  the  moral  re-  and  dis- 

°  .  turbing 

suits  less,3  as  proof  of  its  general  inadequacy  to  reactions, 
impart  moral  truth  in  any  effective  degree.  If 
the  religion  itself  be  corrupted,  its  results,  in  point 
of  moral  effect,  must  needs  suffer  in  proportion, 
and  this  in  amount  corresponding  to  the  power 
which  it  wields.  Thus,  if  the  Middle  Ages  be  state  of 
cited  as  an  instance  of  the  smallness  of  moral  under 
results  obtained  with  a  large  and  prevailing  pro-  cathoib 
fession  of  religion,4  it  may  be  replied,  without Clbm* 


1  Lecky,  Hist.  Bat.,  I.  358. 

2  Condorcet,  CEuvres ,  VI.  234,  quoted  by  Mr.  Morley,  remarks  that 
the  religion  of  books  and  that  of  the  people  may  so  differ  that  the 
effects  absolutely  cease  to  answer  to  the  public  and  recognized  causes. 
This  is  not  allowing  enough  for  an  average  practical  influence,  which 
may  be  compared  to  the  tenor  of  administration  in  politics. 

3  Buckle,  Hist.  Civ.,  I.  191. 

4  See  Dr.  Mozley’s  remarks,  Bamp.  Led.,  p.  115.  Mr.  Lecky,  Hist. 
Bat.,  II.  32,  does  justice  to  the  services  of  Medieval  Catholicism.  In 


i74 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV. 


admitting  tlie  fact  supposed,  that  it  is,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  glory  of  Protestantism  to  have 
effected  so  large  an  improvement  and  so  marked 
an  impulse  with  straitened  means  and  slender 
resources.  For  it  has  certainly  reacted  on  the 
moral  code  and  average  practice  of  the  rival 
creed.  Thus,  the  tacit  moral  force  of  Religion, 
even  in  sceptical  periods,  may  he  unexpectedly 
Corrup-  large.1  Religion,  and  this  is  specially  tiue  ot  the 
ligion  cor-  Christian  religion,  ever  answers  to  a  personal  want 
tomonrdaint in  the  individual  man.  Its  neglect  and  degrada- 
rions.n'  tion  have  accordingly  constantly  accompanied  the 
want  of  culture  in  the  general  development  of 

the  age. 

Positivist  §  5.  It  has,  indeed,  been  argued2  that  History  does 
that  mo-  not  prove  that  society  owes  its  moral  condition  to 
improved,  its  religion.  If,  indeed,  hut  only  if,  religion  were 
christia-  the  single  moral  restraint  on  a  community,  would 
declined,  the  morals  of  an  age,  it  is  insisted,  he  according  to 
its  prevalence  higher  or  lower.  But  the  theological 
principle,  urges  the  Positivist,  has  since  the  Middle 
Ages  been  on  the  decline.  It  has  succumbed  to  the 

this  view  he  follows  Comte  {Phil.  Pos.,  V.  233),  Mill,  Littre,  and  other 
leading  thinkers.  Gibhon  (VII.  60,  ed.  Milman)  enlarges  on  the  moral 
progress  effected  by  Protestantism. 

1  Thus  Dean  Stanley,  Essays ,  p.  465,  remarks  that  “  the  religious 
spirit  of  the  time  lias  deeply  penetrated  those  who  doubt,  misbelieve, 
and  disbelieve.  The  change  is  so  great  that  looking  at  realities,  and  not 
at  names,  we  might  call  the  present  posture  of  philosophers,  of  Jews,  of 
sceptics  towards  Christianity  almost  a  conversion.” 

2  See  M.  Littre  (Aug.  Comte ,  p.  217). 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


175 


opposition  of  science,  to  the  strength  of  industrial 
development,  and  to  the  secularization  of  govern¬ 
ments,  substituting  a  different  principle  to  the  ex¬ 
clusion  of  religious  interests.  Yet  morality  has 
improved.  There  is  more  humanity  in  war,  more 
religious  toleration;  torture  has  been  abolished, 
social  burdens  equalized,  poverty  relieved  and 
ameliorated.  But  the  facts  may  be  admitted  Proceeds 
without  the  inference.  Religion  now  is  better  inference, 
understood  as  to  its  true  work  and  office.  Sur¬ 
rendering  ill-advised  claims,  its  real  influence  is 
strengthened  and  deepened.  And  can  it  be  said  The  power 
that  any  point  of  morality  now  reached  in  theory  tianity  has 
or  practice  is  counter  to  the  teachings  of  the  come6 
G-ospel?  That  our  own  is  an  age  of  faith  or  of  ^effects* 
scepticism,  of  operative  or  inoperative  belief,  may  opiSTon.16 
be  matter  of  opinion  ; 1  that  its  moral  qualities  are 
independent  of  its  faith,  and  public  opinion  of  reli¬ 
gious  belief,  would  be  certainly  difficult  of  proof. 

§  6.  The  attempt  often  made  from  the  days  of  Objection 
Origen2  to  Tindal  and  Bolingbroke  to  prove  that  tianity 
Christianity,  containing  no  new  moral  truth,  can  nTw'momi 

truth. 


1  It  has  been  said  to  be  “destitute  of  faith,  but  terrified  at  scepticism.” 
See  Mr.  Mill,  Liberty ,  c.  ii. 

2  c.  Celsum ,  I.  iv.,  VII.  xxviii.,  lviii.,  lxi.  Compare  Mackay,  Rise 
and  Progress^  of  Christianity ,  pp.  21,  22,  and  Pel.  Level. ,  II.  376-7. 
M.  Renan,  Etudes ,  p.  188.  Mr.  Farrar,  Witness  of  History  to  Christ , 
pp.  135,  137,  has  touched  this  subject  with  his  usual  spirit  and  ability. 
Saisset,  Essaisf  details  as  strictly  Christian  conceptions  the  universality 
of  the  love  of  God  and  universal  fraternity.  These  ideas,  though  latent 
in  human  nature,  are  evoked  by  Christian  civilization. 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  IV. 


176 


GXGrcisG  no  distinct  mor^l  effect,  is  now  ugom  ie- 
vived.  And  doubtless  if  tliG  wIioIg  moral  furniturG 
of  our  being  is  contained  in  a  few  short  precepts, 

‘ ‘ to  do  good  to  others,  to  sacrifice  for  their  benefit 
your  own  wishes,  to  love  your  neighbour  as  your¬ 
self,  to  forgive  your  enemies,  to  restrain  your  pas¬ 
sions,  to  honour  your  parents,  to  respect  those  who 
are  set  over  you;”  if  this  be  all  (as  Mr.  Buckle 
alleges),1  there  might  not  remain  much  to  be  said 
Untrue,  as  to  the  originality  of  Christian  morals.  Though 
some  even  of  these  duties,  it  must  be  allowed,  were 
but  imperfectly  known  and  badly  undei  stood  befoie 
the  preaching  of  the  Gospel.  Christianity,  it  might 
be  shown,  has  added  largely  to  the  very  vocabulary 
Instances  of  morals.  Its  notion  of  holiness,  not  to  speak  of 
repentance,  is  a  new  and  previously  unrealized  con¬ 
ception,  the  illimitable  character  of  which  gua¬ 
rantees  its  permanence.  It  may  not  be  difficult2 
to  cull  from  individual  moralists  of  Greece  and 
Rome,  or  of  East  and  West,  fragments  of  Christian 

1  Hist.  Civ.,  I.  180.  Paley,  on  the  other  hand,  after  asserting  that 
«  morality,  neither  in  the  Gospel  nor  any  other  hook,  can  he  a  subject  of 
discovery,  properly  so  called,”  proceeds  to  show  how  far  the  morality  of 
the  Gospel  is  above  that  of  its  age  and  antecedents,  and  not  to  be 
accounted  for  apart  from  the  pretensions  of  the  religion.— Evid.,  II.  in 

2  See  M.  Denis,  Histoire  des  Theories  et  Ide'es  morales  dans  Vanti- 
quite ,  I.  104 ;  Wollaston’s  laborious  Beligion  of  Nature ,  &c.  Mr. 
Lecky,  H.  E.  M.,  I.  161,  complains  of  the  appropriation  of  heathen 
ideas  by  Christian  moralists.  Augustine,  Doct.  Christ.,  II.  xl.-xlii., 
gracefully  acknowledges  the  debt,  and  fancifully  compares  it  to  spoiling 
the  Egyptians.  “  Nonne  adspicimus,  quanto  auro  et  argento  et  veste 
suffarcinatus  exierit  de  iEgypto  Cyprianus  doctor  suavissimus,  quanto 
Lactantius,”  &c.  Comp.  Lactant.,  Div.  Inst.,  ^  II.  vii. 


1 77 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

duties — to  find  in  Plato  the  recognition  of  repent-  Eclectic 
ance  and  devotion  towards  God,  forgiveness  of  111-  compose 
juries,  or  the  portraiture  of  a  celestial  love ;  in  raiity  of 
Cicero  the  teaching  of  universal  charity,  benevo- theGospeL 
lence,  and  brotherhood.  It  may  even  be  easy  to 
exhibit  under  the  garb  of  moral  realizations  the 
saving  truths  of  faith;  to  see  in  the  salvation 
offered  by  Jesus  the  a no^vyr)  /ca/cmi',1  the  effort  to 
be  as  wise  and  good  as  is  possible  to  man,  contem¬ 
plated  by  the  heathen  Socrates  ;  to  find  in  his  utter¬ 
ance  that  the  gods  will  give  such  things  as  are 
good,  for  they  know  what  is  best  for  man,  the  key¬ 
note  of  Christian  prayer ;  to  recognize  in  the  en¬ 
durance  of  the  martyr  the  independence  of  the 
Stoic  mind,  with  its  larger  virtue  of  patriotism ;  in 
Christian  meekness  and  resignation  towards  God  a 
true  philosophic  constancy  and  courage  ;  to  explain 
the  success  of  Christ’s  Religion  as  u  a  reaction  from 
effete  forms  of  thought  to  fresh  convictions  of  con¬ 
science,”  grappling  with  external  calamity  by  in¬ 
dependent  resources  of  soul.  This  is  easy,  because, 
after  all,  Christianity  must  have  a  moral  side,  and 
ground  itself  in  human  sentiment,  and  here,  accord¬ 
ingly,  comes  into  competition  with  purely  moral 
systems.  Such  a  view,  however,  omits  to  re-  Christian 
member  that  Christianity  founds  moral  practice  based  on 

its  doc¬ 
trines. 

1  See  Plato,  Phced.  107,  c.,  Xen.  Mem.  I.  iii.  2,  &c.  On  the  relation 
of  Platonism  to  Christianity,  comp.  Dollinger,  Gentile  and  Jew ,  I.  328, 
who  justly  thinks  it  to  be  negative  rather  than  positive. 

N 


Chris¬ 
tianity  in¬ 
troduced 
a  higher 
moral 
type. 


178  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV. 

upon  doctrinal  beliefs,1  tlins  procuring  new  sanc¬ 
tions  and  originating  fresb  ideas  within  the  scope 
of  morals.  It  thus  supplied  a  pure  morality  by 
means  of  dogma  before  such  was  recognized 
through  the  medium  of  ethical  science.  Nor  have 
its  dogmas  receded  before  the  advance  of  scientific 
morality.  The  moral  progress  of  modern  Europe, 
while  it  has  found  nothing  discordant  in  the  type 
of  Evangelical  character,  has  tended  to  confirm  the 
distinctive  tenets  of  the  Gospel.2 

§  7.  A  more  thorough  and  searching  examina¬ 
tion  has  sufficiently  demonstrated  the  advance 
towards  a  purer  and  higher  type  of  character 
made  under  the  auspices  of  Christian  doctrine, 
and  as  a  consequence  of  it,  in  the  absolute  em¬ 
bodiment  of  Divine  love  which  it  proposes  to  all 
ages  for  imitation  in  endless  variety.  While 

1  Mr.  Lecky,  II  Bat.,  I.  335-6,  considers  that  dogmatic  systems  serve 
only  to  supply  suitable  motives  of  action  in  the  absence  of  a  moral 
philosophy.  Its  formation,  he  thinks,  is  the  first  step  in  the  decadence 
of  religions.  This  is  true  to  this  extent,  that  the  most  elementary  forms 
of  religion  seem  to  afford  little  trace  of  ethics  (compare  Tylor,  Hist. 
Prim.  Cult.,  I.  386).  On  the  other  hand,  ethics  may,  as  in  Confucian¬ 
ism,  overpower  and  extinguish  the  religious  element.  “  To  give  oneself 
earnestly  to  the  duties  due  to  men,  and  while  respecting  spiritual 
beings,  to  keep  aloof  from  them,  may  be  called  wisdom,”  this  was  the 
maxim  and  practice  of  its  founder. — See  Legge,  II.  130,  319.  But  it 
has  been  truly  said  that  so-called  natural  religion,  the  apotheosis  of 
moral  abstractions,  exists  only  in  books.  Religions  which  have  vital 
force  and  influence,  are  positive  religions,  i.  e.  they  make  for  themselves 
a  Church  and  rites  and  dogmas. 

2  The  course  of  attacks  on  Christianity  from  this  side  has  been,  first,  to 
separate  theology  from  morals,  which,  as  having  a  scientific  basis,  has 
had  some  share  of  success  ;  next,  to  supersede  religion  by  morality,  a 
much  less  hopeful  undertaking. 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


179 


doing  justice  to  pre-Christian  ideas,1  to  the  aims 
of  Stoical  and  Platonic  ethics,  and  to  the  practice 
of  an  Aurelius  and  a  J ulian  “  lending  a  passing 
dignity  to  the  dishonoured  purple,”  it  has  yet 
shown  how  poor  was  the  substitute  they  contem¬ 
plated  for  a  faith  which  appealed  courageously, 
but  also  triumphantly,  to  the  masses,  and  was  the 
creed  alike  of  the  slave  and  of  the  sage.  It  is 
often  thought  enough  to  remark  that  Paganism 
was  doomed  before  Christianity  appeared.  But lt  suc- 
why,  if  this  be  so,  did  Christianity  alone  succeed, from  its 

47  very  su- 

alone  survive  of  all  the  sects  and  schools  which  periority. 
competed  for  the  mastery  of  mankind  ?  Why 
not  simple  monotheism,  or  some  abstract  form  of 
thought  ?  “  Christianity  grew,”  it  has  been  said,2 

“  because  it  could  best  make  good  the  blank  left 
by  the  discredit  of  the  old  religions,  by  the 
despondency,  incredulity,  and  disgust  which  made 
room  for  it.”  True ;  and  these  were  the  first 
results  which  convinced  the  world  and  converted 
it.  It  was  found  to  contain  all  essential  verities.3 
The  fundamental  ideas  of  Natural  Religion  con-  Causes  of 

this  supe- 

1  See  at  length  Mr.  Lccky,  H.  E.  il/.,  I.  180,  190,  363.  “  Of  the  sects  llollt>' 
of  ancient  philosophy  the  Stoic  is  perhaps  the  nearest  to  Christianity. 

Yet  even  to  this  sect  Christianity  is  fundamentally  opposite.” 

2  Mackay,  Rise  and  Progress  of  Christianity ,  p.  163.  See  Neander’s 
reflections  at  the  opening  of  his  history,  I.  p.  3,  and  Dean  Meri vale’s 
Lectures,  p.  xi.  “  Christianity,  in  fact,  was  not  simply  the  resource  of  a 
dissatisfied  philosophy  :  it  was  not  accepted  as  the  only  refuge  from  the 
blank  negation  of  a  creed.  It  was  the  tried  and  approved  of  several 
claimants  to  the  sovereignty  of  the  religious  instincts  among  men.” 

3  Compare  Saisset,  Essais ,  p.  299. 

N  2 


In  what 
manner  a 
result  of 
the  age  in 
which  it 
appeared. 


to  Chris¬ 
tian  mo¬ 
rality  as 
defective. 


180  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV. 

fessedly  belong  to  it.  It  inherited  all  that  is  true 
in  earlier  theologies  and  systems  of  philosophy  J 
the  unity,  the  personality,  the  independence,  the 
energy,  the  love  of  the  Divine  Nature ,  the 
grandeur,  the  littleness,  the  strength,  the  weak¬ 
ness,  the  dignity,  the  responsibility  of  man.  No 
philosophical  mind  would  desire  to  deny  the  obli¬ 
gations  of  Christianity  to  foregoing  systems  among 
which  it  assumes  its  due  and  ordered  rank;2  or 
that  its  teaching  is  in  a  sense  progressive,  the 
outcome  and  result  of  time.  Jewish  prophecy  and 
heathen  philosophy  had  in  different  ways  prepared 
for  its  reception.  Christ  came  to  fulfil  the  Law 
and  the  Prophets ;  the  Law  of  Moses,  it  is  true ; 
but  no  less  the  Law  of  Nature,  and  of  Gentile 
morality  in  its  highest  and  purest  conceptions. 
For  these,  Jewish  Prophecy  no  less  prepared  a 
way,  and  often  antedated  their  spirit.3 

§  8.  A  bold  attempt  has  been  sometimes  made 

1  Compare  Prof.  Jowett  (&  Paul's  Epistles ,  II.  204).  “  The  pecu¬ 

liarity  of  the  Gospel  is  not  that  it  teaches  what  is  wholly  new,  hut  that 
it  draws  out  of  the  treasure  house  of  the  human  heart  things  new  and 
old,  gathering  together  into  one  the  dispersed  fragments  of  the  truth.” 
Of  course  it  is  not  intended  to  represent  Christianity  as  a  mere  system 
of  eclecticism. 

2  Compare  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  V.  349. 

3  “  Christianity,”  remarks  Neander  profoundly,  “  is  the  end  to 
which  all  development  of  the  religious  consciousness  must  tend,  and  of 
which,  therefore,  it  cannot  do  otherwise  than  offer  a  prophetic  testimony. 
Thus  there  dwells  an  element  of  prophecy,  not  merely  in  revealed 
religion,  unfolding  itself  beneath  the  fostering  care  of  the  Divine  Vin¬ 
tager  (John  xv.)  as  it  struggles  onwards  from  Judaism  to  its  com¬ 
plete  disclosure  in  Christianity,  but  also  in  religion,  as  it  grows  wild 
on  the  soil  of  Paganism,  which  by  nature  must  strive  unconsciously  to 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


1 8 1 


to  disparage  the  truth  of  Christianity,  by  charging 
upon  it  the  inculcation  of  defective  morality,  even 
in  the  person  of  its  Founder;1  sometimes  of  im¬ 
moral  developments,  sometimes  of  ethical  rules 
untrue  without  requisite  limitations,  and  impos¬ 
sible  in  practice.2  Such  accusations  may  on  the 
whole  be  left  to  balance  one  another,  as  when  it  Victor 
is  said  by  one  school  that  the  religion  of  Christ 
has  never  sufficiently  encouraged  the  culture  of 
the  intellect,  and  by  another  that  it  gives  a 
factitious  and  disproportionate  influence  to  what 
are  called  “  the  higher  parts  ”  of  human  nature. 

If  the  Altruism  of  the  Positivist  be  deemed  an 

the  same  end.” — Ch.  Hist.,  I.  240,  ed.  Clark.  Comp.  Merivale,  Led., 
p.  70.  “  The  law  is  the  teaching  of  the  human  conscience  generally, 

whether  enlightened  by  a  revelation,  or  any  other  less  special  illumina¬ 
tion  from  above ;  by  the  habits  and  ideas  of  human  society,”  &c. 

1  See  Strauss,  New  Life  of  Jesus  Christ,  I.  438  ;  and  Mr.  F.  Newman 
on  the  Defective  Morality  of  the  New  Test.  “  The  character  of  Christ,” 
said  Paley,  finely  and  truly,  “  is  a  part  of  the  morality  of  the  Gospel.” 

2  Thus  M.  Comte  regards  the  Lutheran  preference  of  Faith  to  Works, 
and  the  Calvinistic  doctrine  of  Predestination,  as  strictly  immoral  in 
their  tendency.  Phil.  Pos.,Y.  685.  Shaftesbury  ( Works,  I.  98) 
charges  on  Christianity  the  omission  of  the  heroic  virtues :  of  patriotism 
and  public  spirit,  and  of  private  friendship.  Yet  Christ  Himself  wept 
over  His  country.  Cf.  also  Porn.  ix.  3,  4.  Mr.  Lecky,  II.  Pat.,  II.  113 
(see  also  II.  E.  M.,  II.  149),  observes,  “  that  Christianity  triumphed  only 
by  transforming  itself  under  the  influence  of  the  spirit  of  sect.”  This 
means  that  it  transferred  men’s  allegiance  from  their  country  to  the 
Church.  I  do  not  think  this  is  properly  chargeable  on  the  principles 
of  the  religion.  Yet,  if  true,  it  would  only  be  substituting  a  much 
larger  area  of  patriotism,  and  one  which  coincides  with  a  large  advance 
in  civilization.  The  practice  of  the  early  Church  (“  Ncc  ulla  res  aliena 
magis  quam  publica,”  Tert.  Apol.  c.  xxxviii.,  and  see  Origen,  c.  Cels., 

VIII.  ii.),  in  this  matter  furnishes  no  proper  estimate  of  the  intentions 
of  the  religion. 


Unpracti¬ 

cal. 


Further 
objections 
from  the 
results  of 
Chris¬ 
tianity. 


182  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV. 

improvement  on  the  morality  of  the  Gospel  in 
living  for  others  without  the  limitation  of  loving 
our  neighbour  only  as  ourselves,  it  seems  not 
unreasonable  to  require  that  this  level  should  first 
be  reached.1  Total  annihilation  of  self,  at  best  an 
impracticable  dream,  was  far  from  the  thought  of 
Him  who  “  knew  what  is  in  man.”  But  Chris¬ 
tianity  has  been  charged  with  other  more  practical 
failures.  Indifferent  and  injurious  to  secular  pro¬ 
gress,  to  material  welfare  and  industrial  develop¬ 
ment  (“  infructuosi  in  negotiis  dicimur”),  it  has 
been  taxed  with  the  custom  of  religious  wars,  of 
persecution  for  opinion,  with  the  institution  of 
torture,  with  doctrines  pernicious  to  sound  morals, 
such  as  absolution,  indulgences,  the  placing  cere¬ 
monial  observance  before  natural  duty,  the  repro¬ 
bation  of  good  actions  wrought  without  the  pale 
of  the  Church,  and  a  benevolence,  however  well- 
meaning,  yet  economically  mistaken.  It  has  been 
blamed  for  errors  in  practice  fraught  with  social 
misery  and  mischief,  yet  consequent  on  Scriptural, 
or  at  the  least  ecclesiastical,  doctrine.2  So  also 
for  shortcomings  in  the  enforcement  of  moral 

1  There  are,  indeed,  some  good  remarks  on  this  point  in  Comte,  Phil. 
Pos.,  IV.  553,  V.  434.  Compare  Prof.  Groldwin  Smith,  Study  of  Hist ., 
p.  3,  and  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer,  Study  of  Sociology ,  Cont.  Rev.,  XXI. 
318-321. 

2  Compare  Condorcet,  as  quoted  by  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  V.  423.  Such 
are  the  medieval  view  of  the  sinfulness  of  usury,  the  treatment  of 
witchcraft,  the  wager  of  battle,  the  institution  of  Monasticism,  &c.  See 
Mr.  Farrar’s  remarks  (  Witness  of  Hist,  to  Christ),  Lecture  V. 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


183 


laws,  with  an  inability,  for  example,  to  suppress 
warfare,  to  prevent  or  redress  social  injustice  and 
economic  errors.  The  importance  of  such  charges  Their  im- 
lies  not  only  in  their  imputation  on  the  moral  esti¬ 
mate  of  Christianity,  but  still  more  on  its  value  as 
an  instrument  in  civilization,  and  as  consequently 
a  permanent  agent  in  human  progress.  Nor  can 
it  be  denied  that  the  evils  in  question  are  in  some  Such  re- 

.  suits  are 

sort  the  results  of  the  teaching  of  Christian  ideas,  notcharge- 

,  1  able  on  the 

Unless,  however,  it  can  be  shown  that  they  are  principles 
the  logical  consequents  of  such  ideas,  their  natural  religion, 
fruit  and  reasonable  issue,  so  that  each  can  be 
referred  to  the  doctrine  on  which  it  rests,  forming 
part  of  the  actual  message  of  Christianity,  no 
vital  blow  has  so  far  been  struck  on  the  armour  of  Case  of 

religious 

Christian  defence.  Religious  wars  were  certainly  wars, 
not  unknown  to  other  times  and  other  systems. 

All  may,  perhaps,  be  more  correctly  attributed  to 
a  political  or  defensive  origin,1  or  to  a  survival 
of  Paganism,  wherein  “  the  kingdom  of  Heaven 
suffered  violence,”  and  “the  violent  took  it  by 
force.”  The  political  effect  of  a  common  faith  is 
to  react  liostilely  upon  foreign  creeds.  Persecu-  Persecu¬ 
tion  for  belief,  whatever  immediate  motive  is  belief, 
assigned  to  it,  was  practised  by  Pagan  rulers  in 

1  Tlie  wars  of  Charlemagne  may  be  cited  in  this  respect:  the 
Crusades  were  actually  defensive.  See  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  V.  404. 

Compare  Paley’s  remarks  on  some  supposed  effects  of  Christianity 
(Paid.,  IT.  vii.).  The  religions  of  Greece  and  of  Home,  so  far  forth  as 
State  institutions,  involved  penal  consequences  and  even  death.  See 
Dollinger,  Gentile  and  Jew,  I.  243-5. 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV. 


184 


pre-Christian  times.  Yet  it  may  be  admitted  that 
both  the  evils  complained  of,  the  custom  of  war¬ 
fare  on  the  score  of  religion,  and  of  persecution 
for  erroneous  belief,  flow  to  some  extent  from  the 
nature  of  the  case,  and  are  due  to  the  action  of 
historical  Christianity.1  Partly,  indeed,  they  were 
based  on  a  false  analogy  of  Christian  duty  with 
the  Levitical  code.  But  there  is  probably  a 
necessary  tendency  in  all  dogmatic  teaching  to 
condemn  error  in  opinion  as  a  duty,  and  that  too 
more  strongly  than  immorality  itself.  Toleration 
even  now  is  not  uncommonly  held  to  involve 
or  imply  scepticism.  Prior  to  experience,  it  is 
expected  that  compulsion  can  procure  uniformity;2 
and  the  golden  rule  is  forgotten,  “  Religionis  non 
est  religionem  cogere.”  The  outward  confession 
of  faith  is  not  readily  distinguished  from  a  saving 
implicit  belief;  and  in  the  confusion  compulsion 
is  enlisted  on  the  side  of  a  mistaken  humanity, 
whether  for  the  victim  or  the  survivor;3  but, 

1  The  judicial  murder  of  Priscillian  dates  a.d.  3S6.  It  was  con¬ 
demned  hy  Ambrose  and  Martin  of  Tours,  though  not  by  Leo.  The 
early  Christian  apologists  naturally  express  themselves  on  the  side  of 
toleration.  Lactantius,  but  fifty  years  before  the  death  of  Priscillian, 
and  himself  a  resident  at  Treves,  thus  writes :  “  Religio  cogi  non  potest ; 
verbis  potius  quam  verberibus  res  agenda  est  ut  sit  voluntas.  Nihil 
est  tarn  voluntarium  quam  religio.” — Dfv.  Inst.,  V.  xx. 

2  And  so  indeed,  in  fact,  it  has  succeeded  in  doing  :  but  only  after 
the  manner  of  those  who,  in  the  words  of  Tacitus,  “  solitudinem  faciunt, 
pacem  appellant.” 

3  See  Mr.  Leaky’s  remarks,  Hist.  Rat.,  II.  11,  Hist.  Eur.  Mor.;  I.  420, 
on  the  inevitable  tendency,  if  not  the  moral  compulsion,  to  proselytism 
which  underlies  an  assumed  possession  of  truth.  See  Dean  Hook,  Lives 
of  Archb.,  N.  S.,  I.  7-9. 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


185 


however  present  to  the  eye  of  the  Founder  of^1^ 
our  religion  as  a  result  of  the  leaven  wherewith 
He  leavened  the  Church  and  the  world,  can  this 
fact  be  properly  urged  against  His  teaching  as  a 
fault  or  a  crime?  Rather  it  is  the  consequence 
of  its  historical  development,  of  the  tardy  course  of 
human  affairs,1  and,  philosophically  considered,  of 
the  imperfection  and  limitation  of  the  creature. 


By  the  union  and  identification  of  the  Church  and  Com;se  of 

J  events. 


Empire,  orthodoxy  became  an  Imperial  interest, 
and  persecution  for  opinion  was  rendered  not  only 
possible,  but  politically  incumbent.  It  is  not,  then, 
the  words  of  Christ,2  which  are  answerable  for  the 
teaching  of  a  duty  of  persecution.  God  forbid.  But 
rather  the  supremacy,  in  the  State,  of  the  Church. 
Heresy  and  schism,  as  ecclesiastical  offences,  were 
put  on  the  same  footing  with  rebellion  as  a  civil 
crime.3 


S  0.  But,  it  may  still  he  said,  these  evils  are  The  his- 

5  y  7  ...  .  torical  rf 

chargeable  on  Christianity  as  a  system,  as  an  his- suits  of 


torical  fact ;  they  have  followed  in  its  tram.  And,  tianity,  no 

i  tv  T  *  X*  cI°uT>t,  of  a 

no  doubt,  it  is  not  intended  to  clear  the  Religion  ot  mixed 


r-lmrnrtpr. 


1  “  For  fifteen  hundred  years  after  the  establishment  of  the  Christian 
religion  it  was  intellectually  and  morally  impossible  that  any  religion 
that  was  not  material  and  superstitious  could  have  reigned  over  Europe.” 
— Lecky,  B.  R.,  II.  227. 

2  “Compel  them  to  come  in.”  See  Bayle’s  famous  treatise  (Contrains- 
les  d'entrer),  and  Ffoulkes’  Div.  Christ .,  pp.  91-2. 

3  There  is  a  remarkable  defence  in  Dr.  Draper’s  Hist,  of  the  Intellec¬ 
tual  Bevel,  in  Europe  (I.  134)  of  the  medieval  policy  ot  repression, 
grounded  on  a  supposed  foresight  of  the  fearful  consequences  ol  the 
intellect  of  a  people  outgrowing  their  religious  formula?. 


1 86  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV. 


The  evils 
not  in¬ 
herent  in 
the  system, 


and 

transient. 


Due  to 
Scriptural 
misinter¬ 
pretation. 


Instances. 


Christ  of  all  its  attendant  effects,  as  though  the 
brightest  light  never  cast  a  shadow.  The  innocent 
blood  shed  by  the  Churches  of  East  and  West  is  the 
price  paid  for  the  enforcement  of  dogmas  otherwise 
fraught  with  good.  It  is  enough  to  weigh  in  the 
balance  the  acknowledged  services  of  Christianity 
against  its  confessed  ills  ;  and  more  especially  to 
examine  whether  such  evils  are  jiroperly  inherent 
in  its  frame.1  If  not,  they  need  not,  it  is  clear,  over¬ 
cloud  its  future.  As  a  matter  of  fact  we  have 
already  outlived  them.  The  opinions  to  which 
they  are  due,  are  now  admitted  to  be  elements 
foreign  to  the  nature  of  our  Religion,  antagonistic 
to  its  inner  life  and  spirit,  and  inconsistent  with  its 
central  ideas.2  Thus  a  real  distinction  has  always 
to  be  drawn  between  faulty  inferences  or  erroneous 
applications  of  Scriptural  language  to  the  subjects 
of  morals,  policy,  and  science,  and  the  actual  and 
eternal  teaching  of  the  Bible.  The  very  tendency 
manifest  in  the  general  history  of  nations  to  em¬ 
ploy  religion,  outside  of  its  central  scheme,  as  a 
political  engine  in  matters  of  social  law  and  civil 
government,  has  led  to  this  result.  Of  this  cha¬ 
racter"  are  the  notions  of  usury  being  immoral,  of 


1  “  Le  Christianisme  a  6te  intolerant :  mais  l'in tolerance  n’est  pas 
un  fait  essenti  el  lenient  chretien.”  —  Renan,  Vie  de  Jesus- Christ 
p.  412. 

2  See  some  good  remarks  on  this  subject  in  the  Christian  Remem¬ 
brancer,  No.  CXXXI.,  p.  232. 

3  For  the  political  economy  of  Christianity,  as  not  being  incompatible 
with  historical  progress,  see  Goldwin  Smith  {Led.,  p.  39). 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  187 

the  production  of  wealth  being  condemned,  of  a 
community  of  goods,  of  one  absolute,  universal 
form  of  political  government,  of  the  unlawfulness 
of  military  defence.  Political  and  economic  errors 
have  on  these  subjects  shielded  themselves  with  the 
authority  of  Inspiration,  and,  by  rendering  scien¬ 
tific  progress  impossible,  have  risked  the  perma¬ 
nence  of  Christianity  itself.  But  with  the  advance 
of  knowledge  and  free  inquiry  this  confusion  has 
been  long  on  the  wane.  Salmasius,1  for  example, 
wrote  successfully  to  correct  the  medieval  idea  that 
the  Bible  condemns  usury,  and  Protestantism  found 
no  difficulty  in  receiving  the  correction.  The  true 
embarrassment  lay  in  the  claims  of  Roman  Catholic 
tradition.  Some  errors  might  more  properly  be 
regarded  as  anticipations  of  truth.  Thus  primitive 
Christianity  found  in  a  transient  communism2  a 
natural  expression  of  new-born  love  and  zeal.  It 
never  sought  to  erect  a  doctrine,  inimical  to  all  eco- 

1  See  Mr.  Lecky,  11.  But.,  1J.  290,  who  has  pursued  the  whole 
inquiry  with  his  usual  vigour  and  in  a  fair  spirit.  Mr.  Buckle  (I.  283) 
on  the  contrary  declaims,  with  heat,  against  “  the  ignorant  interference 
of  Christian  rulers,”  forgetting  that  other  religions  have  at  least  made 
the  same  mistakes.  Thus  the  Mahometan  law  prohibits  interest  alto¬ 
gether,  with  the  natural  result.  See  Wealth  of  Nations,  Bk.  I.  c.  ix. 

2  Resting  mainly  on  Luke  xii.  33.  The  rhetorical  statement  of 
Tertullian  is  well  known  ( Apol .,  xxxix.)  :  “  Omnia  indiscreta  sunt  apud 
nos  prater  uxores.”  Clement  of  Alexandria,  in  his  treatise  Quis  dives 
salvetur ,  rejects  the  notion  of  communism.  See  also  Strom.,  III.  449, 
and  Augustine,  Hcer.,  c.  xl.  In  Enarr.  in  Ps.  124,  §  2,  he  rebukes 
the  opinion  that  “  non  debuit  Deus  facere  pauperes :  sed  soli  divites 
esse  debuerunt.”  On  the  view  of  Ambrose  as  to  the  right  of  property 
in  land  (de  Off.  Minist.,  I.  xxviii.,  and  Serm.  8  in  Ps.  118,  §  22),  see 
Schmidt,  Esscii,  p.  259  ;  also  Champagny,  Charite  Chretienne . 


And  to 
premature 
move¬ 
ments. 


1 88 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV. 


uomical  progress  into  a  normal  condition  of  society. 
“  Whenever  a  great  religious  movement,”  it  has 
been  truly  said,  “  has  taken  place  iii  history,  the 
spirit  of  humanity  has  beaten  in  this  way  against 
its  earthly  bars,  and  struggled  to  realize  at  once 

a 

that  which  cannot  be  realized  within  any  calculable 
time,  if  it  is  destined  ever  to  be  realized  here.”1 

charges  of  &io.  The  charge  of  feebleness  and  inutility  is, 

feebleness  o  o  j  7 

tiiity nU"  ^11(^eC(^?  °f  a  wholly  different  kind ;  and  will .  be 
variously  estimated  by  different  persons  according 
to  the  measure  of  their  previous  expectation  of  the 
working  of  Christianity.  But  it  must  be  borne 

Too  in  mind  that  we  are  no  judges  of  its  possible 

general.  #  ° 

or  of  its  proper  operation ; 2  of  the  relations  or 
course  of  affairs  which  make  up  the  government 
of  the  world.  Nor  can  Christianity  be  fairly 
accused  of  failure  in  these  respects,  unless  indeed 

should  be  the  result  has  not  answered  to  its  own  predictions. 

tested  by  1 

its  own  But  this  it  is  not  attempted  to  show.  Thus  the 

predictions  .  x 

of  itself,  continuance  of  wars  among  mankind  has  been 
deemed  in  some  quarters  a  strong  objection  to 

1  Prof.  Goldwin  Smith,  n.  s.,  p.  41. 

2  For  Bishop  Butler’s  canon  is  no  less  true  than  stern  :  “  Objections 
against  Christianity,  as  distinguished  from  objections  against  its 
evidence,  are  frivolous.” — Anal.,  II.  iii.  For  if  the  natural  and  moral 
government  of  God  be  a  scheme  but  imperfectly  comprehensible,  how 
much  more  so  is  the  course  of  revealed  religion.  “  When  we  argue,” 
says  Paley,  “  concerning  Christianity,  that  it  must  necessarily  be  true 
because  it  is  beneficial,  we  go,  perhaps,  too  far  on  one  side ;  and  we 
certainly  go  too  far  on  the  other  when  we  conclude  that  it  must  be 
lalse  because  it  is  not  so  efficacious  as  we  could  have  supposed.” — 
Evid .,  11.  vi. 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


189 


the  usefulness  and  credit  of  Christianity.1  But 
such  objectors  fail  to  perceive  that  the  continued 
existence  of  warfare  is  a  result  of  man’s  moral 
nature  remaining  unchanged,  and  this  perhaps  by 
an  express  provision  of  nature,  wars  being  a  main 
element  in  the  course  of  rudimentary  civilization  at 
the  least.  No  doubt,  it  is  the  work  of  the  Religion  These  are 

in  course 

of  Christ  to  bring  about  this  change.  It  does  so  of  fulfil- 

i  •  mcnt- 

by  substituting  larger  and  unselfish  sympathies ; 
by  reducing  the  theory  of  war  to  a  defensive  in¬ 
stead  of  an  offensive  basis.2  But  His  kingdom  upon 
the  earth  in  the  hearts  and  spirits  of  men,  though 
universal,  was  to  be  created  slowly  by  suasion, 
not  by  miracle.3  There  is  no  engagement  on  its 
part  to  abolish  selfishness,  passion,  sin,  speedily  or 
throughout.  By  slow"  advances  in  individual  sancti¬ 
fication  a  higher  level  was  to  be  reached  of  moral 
type,  of  peacefulness  and  love.  The  present  com-  increased 
parative  rarity  of  war  in  respect  of  former  ages  is  wars, 
admitted.  Little  by  little,  it  may  be  hoped,  this 
scourge  is  retreating  before  the  march  of  civili¬ 
zation.  Trade,  law,  diplomacy,  literature,  political 

1  See  Mr.  Buckle,  Hist.  Civ.,  1. 191.  Mr.  Lccky,  Hist.  Bat.,  II.  384, 
arguing  from  a  general  immemorial  union  between  the  sacerdotal  and 
the  military  spirit,  infers  that  no  theological  agencies  are  pacific.  This 
is  hardly  convincing.  See  also  II.  E.  M.,  II.  269. 

2  See  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  V.  82.  Mr.  Freeman  ( Norman  Cong., 

I.  33)  observes,  “  the  evangelical  precepts  of  peace  and  love  did  not 
put  an  end  to  war  ;  they  did  not  put  an  end  to  aggressive  conquests,  but 
they  distinctly  humanized  the  way  in  which  war  was  carried  on.” 

3  Compare  Dr.  Mozley,  Bamp.  Led.,  p.  17 :  “  We  can,  indeed,  in 
imagination  conceive,”  &c. 


IIow  far 
due  to 
Christian 
influence. 


Relations 
between 
science 
and  Chris¬ 
tianity. 


Whether 
formidable 
to  the  per¬ 
manence 
of  our 
religion. 


190  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV. 

science,  even  the  invention  of  fire-arms  and  im¬ 
proved  means  of  locomotion,  have  been  assigned  a 
share  in  this  momentous  change.1  But  has  the 
religious  sentiment  been  altogether  without  part 
in  it ;  and  among  other  elements  is  no  effect  to  be 
attributed  to  the  spread  of  a  purer  Christianity  ? 
An  under-current  of  humiliation  mixes  now  with 
the  Te  Dewns  of  victory ;  and  ministers  of  mercy 
claim  their  place  in  the  ranks  of  contending  armies. 
A  growing  sense  of  the  folly  of  war  may  he  due  to 
advancing  culture ;  a  conviction  of  its  wickedness 
can  only  spring  from  a  Religion  whose  mission  upon 
earth  is  “  peace,  good  will  toward  men.” 

§  11.  We  have  been  led  more  than  once  in  our 
preceding  remarks  to  the  confines  of  a  subject 
which,  in  our  review  of  objections  to  the  progress 
and  permanence  of  Christianity,  is  the  last  await¬ 
ing  examination;  I  mean,  the  relations  between 
Science  and  Religion  ;  their  distinctive  position  and 
respective  consummation.  Is  this  peace  or  war  ? 
Is  a  modus  vivendi  practicable  between  them  ? 
Or  do  they  necessarily  and  eternally  conflict  ?  As 
darkness  flees  at  the  approach  of  dawn,  must  one 
pale  before  the  other’s  rising  beams ;  and  is  this 
the  fate  reserved  for  the  time-honoured  claims 

1  See  Buckle,  u.  s.,  I.  203,  224.  Christian  efforts  in  this  direction, 
put  forth  in  the  darkest  and  most  violent  ages,  even  where  unsuc¬ 
cessful,  should  not  he  disparaged.  Such  were  the  “  Peace  of  God,”  the 
“  Truce  of  God  ”  (the  former  having  the  wider  scope),  and  the  like.  See 
Gieseler,  II.  447.  Robertson,  Church  Hist .,  II.  504-5  ;  also  Lecky, 
Hist.  Fat.,  II.  115. 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  191 


of  Eeli  gion,  as  hitherto  understood ;  and  in  espe¬ 
cial  for  the  faith  of  Jesus  Christ,  under  the  full 
light  and  fierce  heat  of  a  noontide  civilization  ? 

Some,  it  is  true,  still  hold  that  a  real  conflict  in  the  view 
between  Science  and  Religion  is  in  the  nature  of  no  real  ’ 
things  unlikely  or  impossible.  “  Not  only  are  the  between 
two  heterogeneous;1  but  the  results  of  Science, thcm' 
whether  physical  or  human,  are  part  of  the  data 
which  it  is  the  function  of  Religion  to  co-ordinate.” 

“  The  time  is  approaching,”  says  a  careful  and 
impartial  writer,2  “  when  it  will  he  generally 
perceived  that,  so  far  from  Science  being  opposed 
to  Religion,  true  Religion  without  Science  is  im¬ 
possible.  And  if  we  consider  the  various  aspects 
of  Christianity  as  understood  by  different  nations, 
we  can  hardly  fail  to  perceive  that  the  dignity, 
and  therefore  the  truth,  of  their  religious  beliefs 
is  in  direct  relation  to  the  knowledge  of  Science 
and  of  the  great  physical  laws  by  which  our 
universe  is  governed.”  “  The  natural  works  of 
God,”  wrote  Faraday,3  “can  never  by  any  possi¬ 
bility  come  in  contradiction  with  the  higher  things 
which  belong  to  our  future  existence  ...  I  do  not 
think  it  at  all  necessary  to  tie  the  study  of  the 
Natural  Sciences  and  Religion  together.” 

On  the  other  hand,  a  multitude  of  reasons  have  Opposite 

view  • 

been  adduced  to  weaken  this  position.  “  Of  all  anta- 


1  Prof.  Westcott,  Cant.  Iiev.,  VIII.  377. 

2  Sir  J.  Lubbock,  Orig.  Civ.,  p.  256. 


5  Life,  II.  19G.  , 


Appeals  to 
experi¬ 
ence. 


Grounds 
of  this 
opinion. 


192  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV. 

gonisms  of  belief,”  says  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer,1  “the 
oldest,  the  widest,  the  most  profound,  and  the  most 
important,  is  that  between  Religion  and  Science. 
It  commenced  when  the  recognition  of  the  simplest 
uniformities  in  surrounding  things  set  a  limit  to 
the  previously  universal  fetishism.  It  shows  itself 
everywhere  throughout  the  domain  of  human  know¬ 
ledge,  affecting  man’s  interpretations  alike  of  the 
simplest  mechanical  accidents  and  of  the  most  com¬ 
plicated  events  in  the  histories  of  nations.  It  has 
its  roots  deep  down  in  the  diverse  habits  of  thought 
of  different  orders  of  minds.”2  Then  the  tests  of 
history  and  experience,  it  is  said,  prove  the  uniform 
undeviating  growth  of  knowledge,  and  a  corre¬ 
sponding  decline  in  the  power  and  spread  of  Re¬ 
ligion.  This,  indeed,  is  a  matter  of  fact,  and,  as 
such,  admits  a  direct  reply.  But  next,  it  is  added, 
there  are  circumstances  to  explain  this  alleged  re¬ 
sult.  All  advance  is  intellectual ;  Religion  is  of  its 
own  nature  stationary,  conservative,  reactionary. 
This  is  the  very  moral  of  the  history  of  Persecution 

1  First  Principles ,  p.  12. 

2  Prof.  Huxley  takes  up  different  ground:  “  The  present  antagonism 
between  theology  and  science  does  not  arise  from  any  assumption  by 
the  men  of  science  that  all  theology  must  necessarily  be  excluded  from 
science ;  but  simply  because  they  are  unable  to  allow  that  reason  and 
morality  have  two  weights  and  two  measures  ;  and  that  the  belief  in  a 
proposition  because  authority  tells  you  it  is  true,  or  because  you  wish 
to  believe  it,  which  is  a  high  crime  and  misdemeanor  when  the 
subject-matter  of  reason  is  of  one  kind,  becomes,  under  the  alias  of 
i  faith,  the  greatest  of  all  virtues  when  the  subject-matter  of  reason  is 
of  another  kind.” — Pont,  Pev.,  XVIII.  457. 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


193 


for  belief.  Again,  Revelation  is  incompatible  not 
only  with  the  claims  of  Reason,  but  with  the  results 
of  Science.  The  advance  of  knowledge  undermines 
the  bases  of  religious  beliefs  by  impairing  the  states 
of  mind  on  which  they  repose,  and  the  needs  for 
which  they  exist.  By  explaining  phenomena,  by 
reducing  them  to  universal  invariable  expressions, 
by  substituting  continued  for  free  agency,  most 
existing  religions,  all  in  fact  but  a  religion  of 
Nature,  if  such  really  exists,  are  merged  in  the 
scale  of  superstitions  unworthy  of  scientific  accept¬ 
ance.  For  the  sphere  of  Knowledge  is  held  to  be 
positive ;  the  real  is  bounded  by  the  realm  of  sen¬ 
sation;  all  beyond  is  chimerical,  is  vain.  Wonder 
recedes  as  the  antecedents  of  all  phenomena  become 
known  ;  and  with  wonder  fear,  and  with  fear  rever¬ 
ence,  and  with  reverence  adoration,  and  with  ado¬ 
ration  the  caput  mortuum  of  religious  belief. 

§  1 2.  Not  to  admit  a  fact  is,  of  course,  to  disallow  The  truth 
the  reasons  by  which  it  is  sought  to  be  explained,  view 
If  Religion  (I  speak  more  particularly  of  the  Faith  (lenud' 
of  Jesus  Christ)  exhibits  no  decline,  it  may  be  held 
unnecessary  to  dispute  the  alleged  conditions  of 
such  a  catastrophe.  It  may  be  well,  notwithstand¬ 
ing,  to  encounter  the  particular  objections  against 
the  prospects  of  Christianity  which  have  been  here  Reasons 
brought  within  view.  They  affect  its  past  as  well  ing  it  in 
as  its  future,  explaining  its  successes  by  other  than 
spiritual  antecedents,  and  denying  it  a  career  in  the 


0 


194 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IY. 

ultimate  advance  of  mankind.  Let  us  inquire,  then, 
in  the  first  place,  whether  it  be  true  that  in  Religion 
we  find  the  sole  branch  of  human  activity  which  is 
of  a  stationary  character,  ever  looking  backward, 
never  forward  ;  bound  by  the  laws  of  its  being  to 
a  rigid  immobility.  What  is  the  conception  of  its 
nature  which  necessitates  such  inferences  respect¬ 
ing  it  ? 

Concep-  All  Religion,  I  apprehend,  in  this  view  of  it,  being 
nature  of 6  based  on  a  fundamental  Revelation,  is  assumed  to 
principles  announce  truths  of  a  final  and  unique  character, 
thisWvieCw  capable  of  extension  by  nothing  unless  a  further 
1S  based  revealment,  conveyed  through  a  special  illumina¬ 
tion.  But  such  a  mode  of  information  is  not  only 
beyond  and  beside,  it  is  in  opposition  to,  the  ordi¬ 
nary  means  and  ways  of  knowledge.  For  these  are 
tentative  and  curious  of  inquiry ;  so  that  the  position 
of  knowledge  in  respect  of  an  existing  standard  of 
belief  or  duty  can  never  be  guaranteed,  neither  can 
it  even  temporarily  acquiesce  in  any  foregone  con¬ 
clusion.  It  is  in  this  way,  then,  that  while  Religion 
is  stationary,  Science  and  Thought  inherently  pro- 
How  far  gress.  In  reply  it  may  be  admitted  that  a  truth  of 

admissible.  _  ^ 

Revelation  is  not  homogeneous  with  the  conclusions 
of  research,  experiment,  or  reason.1  It  is  accepted 
Distinct  on  other  and  particular  grounds ;  accordingly  its 
religious  sphere  of  relation  is  special  also.  Its  kingdom  is 
not  of  this  world.  It  deals  not  with  that  whicli 


1  Compare  Dr.  J.  H.  Newman,  Essay  on  level.,  c.  iii.  §  5. 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


195 


constitutes  the  real  limit  of  positive  knowledge, 
the  present  physical  condition  of  the  universe ;  it 
carries  us  on  to  that  region  of  the  unseen  or  super¬ 
natural1  upon  which  Nature  everywhere  borders 
and  rests.  The  phenomena  which  it  explains  point 
to  a  future  stage  of  being,  with  which  alone  it  is 
properly  occupied.  Its  home  is  in  the  spirit  of  man, 
his  conscience,  the  higher  reason  and  will.  “  The 
natural  man  receiveth  not  the  things  of  the  spirit 
of  Grod,  for  they  are  foolishness  unto  him  ;  neither 
can  he  know  them,  because  they  are  spiritually  dis¬ 
cerned.”2  The  beliefs  which  these  inspire  are  no 
affirmations  of  the  intellect  only — no  products  of 
the  logical  faculty.  Its  dry  light  has  here  no  place 
or  room.  They  address  themselves  to  the  spirit  in  why 

•  Called 

man,  and  by  a  living*  act  of  that  spirit  they  are  spiritual. 

apprehended  and  appropriated.  Psychologically 
they  are  instances  of  that  indefinite  consciousness 
which,  as  has  been  well  said,  “cannot  be  formu¬ 
lated.”  They  are  thoughts  which,  “  though  11X1-  Their  psy- 
possible  to  complete,  are  real,  being  normal  affec-  character 
tions  of  the  mind,”3  Nor  is  there  anything  on 
this  side  of  man’s  nature  which  is  truly  reactionary 
in  its  relation  to  mundane  knowledge.  Industrial 
development,  for  example,  has  been  held  to  be 


In  our  definitions,  says  Itmerson,  “  we  grope  after  the  spiritual 
by  describing  it  as  invisible.  The  true  meaning  of  spiritual  is  real : 
that  law  which  executes  itself,  which  works  without  means,  and  which 
cannot  be  conceived  as  not  existing.” 

2  1  Cor.  ii.  14. 

:!  Herbert  Spencer,  First  Princ .,  p.  88. 

0  2 


196 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  IV. 


not  truly 
reaction¬ 
ary 


or  aggres¬ 
sive. 


At  what 
point  an¬ 
tagonistic 
to  science 
or  natural 
know¬ 
ledge. 


inconsistent  with  theological  beliefs  from  being  in 
its  nature  secular,  and  depending  on  the  fixity  of 
natural  laws.  But  is  the  earth,  we  may  ask,  to  be 
less  well  tilled,  its  riches  straitened,  its  secrets  less 
amply  communicated,  because  Revelation  unfolds 
the  home  beyond,  where  the  “  wicked  cease  from 
troubling  and  the  weary  are  at  rest  ”  ?  Surely,  as 
a  matter  of  experience,  it  is  true  that  “  man  doth 
not  live  by  bread  alone.”  The  true  strength  of 
Religion,  then,  lies  in  its  allowing  all  other  in¬ 
tellectual  activity  to  he  progressive  and  indefinite ; 
a  very  u  infinite  of  thought.”  For  itself  it  claims 
only  a  just  acquiescence  in  human  testimony  tor  its 
evidence,  and  the  confluence  of  the  higher  instincts 
with  its  revelations.  It  66  speaks  not  in  words 
which  man’s  wisdom  teacheth,  but  which  the  Holy 
Ghost  teacheth,  comparing  spiritual  things  with 
spiritual.”  “  Thus  may  we  know  the  things  which 
are  freely  given  to  us  of  God.”  No  antagonism, 
then,  with  the  tendencies  or  results  of  Science  is  to 
be  feared,  but  such  as  renders  the  existence  of  a 
spiritual  element  in  man  unlikely  or  impossible.1 
Around  this  central  fact  the  battle  must  be  waged 
of  atheism  with  faith  in  God,  of  secularism  with 
theology,  of  materialism  with  Christianity.  For 
the  rest  the  discoveries  of  Science  constitute  no 
standing  menace  to  the  teachings  of  Revelation : 

1  Compare  Prof.  Goldwin  Smith’s  noble  reflections,  Lect.  on  Study  of 
Hist.,  p.  46.  “  Let  true  science  make  what  discoveries  it  will,  for  ex¬ 

ample,  as  to  the  origin  of  life,”  &c. 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


197 


nor  needs  Religion  perish  because  Knowledge 
strides  onward.  They  occupy,  in  fact,  distinct 
spheres,  moving  in  different  planes  ;  nor  do  they 
touch  each  other  vitally  in  one  point  of  their  cir¬ 
cumference.  No  doubt,  this  has  not  been  always, 
if  it  be  now,  understood.  There  have  been  eras  in  Foregone 
human  progress  when  the  claims  of  Theology  have 
been  alike  extravagant  and  fatal.  There  have 
been  martyrs  consequently  in  science  no  less  than 
for  religious  belief.1  Rested  upon  false  and  foreign 
pretentions  the  very  truth  of  Christianity  as  a 
whole  has  been  put  on  its  trial,  and  has  been  staked 
upon  impossible  or  insignificant  issues.  Eppur  si 
muove  is  the  answer  to  all  such  disputations.  But  These  al- 
have  not  these  already,  at  least  in  large  measure,  the  de- 
passed  away  ?  The  strange  passion  for  balancing 
the  whole  structure  of  Christian  truth  on  isolated 
and  subsidiary  questions  has  well-nigh  burnt  itself 
out ;  while  those  which  still  remain  are  yielding  to 
the  gentler  touch  of  reason  and  of  time.2  In  thus  Past 

lessons. 

speaking,  I  do  not  say  that  it  is  not  good  in  these 
latter  days  to  re-read,  in  some  of  its  portions,  the 


1  Though,  according  to  Cyprian,  “esse  martyr  non  potest  qui  in 
Ecclesia  non  est.” — De  Unit.  Fed.  Augustine  remarked  more  justly, 
“  Martyrem  non  facit  poena  sed  causa.” 

2  Xpovos  evpaprjs  6eos. — Soph.  It  is  the  more  to  be  regretted  that 

here  and  there  some  ill-timed  psean  of  victory  on  the  side  of  science 
seeks  to  fan  the  decaying  embers  of  theological  jealousies.  Thus  it  is 
proclaimed  that  “  the  gradual  destruction  of  the  old  theology  is  every¬ 
where  preceded  by  the  growth  and  diffusion  of  physical  truths.” — 
Ihickle,  III.  478.  “  Extinguished  theologians,”  cries  another,  “  lie 

about  the  cradle  of  every  science  as  the  strangled  snake  beside  that  of 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  IV. 


198 


history  of  the  Church :  and  by  its  tempered  light, 
chequered  with  the  fortunes  of  the  past,  re-adjust 
the  relations  of  doctrine  to  the  demands  of  Science 
and  the  warnings  of  experience.  Much  in  days 
gone  by  has  been  assailed,  which  now  we  should 
be  careful  to  accept.  Much  has  been  maintained 
which  now  we  do  not  care  to  defend. 


Non  tali  auxilio,  non  defensoribus  istis 
Tempus  eget. 

The  letter  of  inspiration,  the  questionable  text,  the  * 
unwarranted  reading  or  rendering,  the  long-drawn 
dubious  inference,  the  uncertain  voice  of  tradition, 
the  arrogant  ill-founded  assumption  of  the  supre¬ 
macy  of  authority  over  reason,  of  dogma  over  con¬ 
science,  the  little-heeded  intruded  fallacy,  at  best 
the  poor  fabric  of  human  ingenuity  imported  into 
a  heaven-sent  mystery  (for  Scriptura  non  fallit,  si 
se  homo  non  f allot)  ;x  all  these  must  pass  away,  and 
with  them  the  heats  and  bickerings,  the  jealousies 
Spirit  of  and  variance  of  bygone  controversies.  For  never 
message.  1  will  the  work  of  Christ  take  root,  or  the  message 
of  His  salvation  go  forward  among  men,  till  it  is 
known  and  felt  that  44  that  message  is  peace,  and 
its  effect  quietness  and  assurance  for  ever.”  Yet  it 
must  be  admitted  that  throughout  the  past  history 

Hercules.”  —  Huxley,  Lay  S.,  p.  305.  As  a  matter  of  fact  wliat 
essential  portions  can  be  named  of  Christian  orthodoxy  which  have  been 
surrendered  or  destroyed  ?  Some  fancied  outwork  perchance,  some  moss- 
grown  battlement:  but  what  vital  doctrine  of  the  faith  or  saving 
truth  ? 

1  Augustin,  de  Urbis  Excidio,  c.  ii. 


199 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


of  the  Christian  Church,  in  proportion  to  the  intri¬ 
cacy,  doubtfulness,  and  transcendental  character  of 
the  dogma  involved,  the  passions  of  men  have  risen 
highest,  their  feelings  have  been  the  most  deeply 
stirred,1  till  error  has  been  magnified  into  guilt, 
and  difficulty  of  conviction  into  reprobation.  In  The  per- 

.  manence 

view  of  the  permanence  of  the  Faith  which  we  m-  of  chris- 
herit,  it  is  important  to  remember  that,  while  in  no  a  religion 
wise  committed  to  the  errors  of  the  past,  Chris-  ftTps? e*2 
tianity  has  before  it  all  the  promise  of  the  future.  penencc' 
A  sense  of  the  reality  of  Christian  truth  as  a 
spiritual  religion,  based  not  so  much  on  logical 
convictions  as  on  a  personal  relation  of  the  believer 
to  the  “  Grod  of  the  spirits  of  all  flesh,”  “  Who  hath 
spoken  unto  us  by  his  Son,”  this  it  is  which  is 
essential  to  the  progress  of  Christianity  among 
mankind.  Hence  our  safeguard  against  surrender-  vital  doc- 
ing  the  vital  elements  of  an  objective  faith  in  mis-  been  as- 

•  •  certamed 

taken  consideration  for  the  doubts  and  difficulties  and  tested, 
of  a  half  belief.  “  He  that  is  not  with  us,  is  against 
us ;  and  he  that  gatliereth  not  with  Me,  scattereth 


1  “  Divisions  in  matter  of  religion,”  says  Hooker,  “  are  hotlier  prose¬ 
cuted  and  pursued  than  other  strifes,  forasmuch  as  coldness,  which  in 
other  contentions  may  he  thought  to  proceed  from  moderation,  is  not  in 
these  so  favourably  construed.” — Vol.  II.,  p.  4,  ed.  Keble.  Johnson 
attributed  it  to  personal  uneasiness  when  our  confidence  in  an  opinion 
which  we  value  is  diminished.  But  Coleridge,  with  more  penetration, 
has  observed  that  deep  feeling  has  a  tendency  to  combine  with  obscure 
ideas ;  a  fact  not  confined  to  professed  theologians,  but  exhibited  by 
whole  nations. — Friend ,  1. 138.  Merivale,  Conversion  of  North.  Nations , 
pp.  42,  43,  has  well  shown  that  “  Arianism  was  hut  a  slightly  disguised 
Paganism  :  and  so  no  question  of  a  letter,”  &c. 


200 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV, 


Prospects 
of  Chris¬ 
tianity  in 
favour  of 
ultimate 
unity. 


Value  of 
the  prin¬ 
ciple  of 
Protestan¬ 
tism. 


abroad,”  speaks  surely  an  eternal  warning.  The 
victories  of  Christianity  have  everywhere  been  the 
triumphs  of  a  definite  faith.  It  has  ever  given 
forth  to  the  world  no  uncertain  sound  in  its  con¬ 
flicts  with  Rationalism  or  with  the  passions  and 
licence  of  mankind.  The  residuum  of  a  religion 
from  which  there  has  been  carefullv  filtered  off  all 
special  truths  and  objects  of  belief,  retaining  only 
some  few  moral  generalities,  can  but  issue  in  some¬ 
thing  very  dissimilar  to  a  living  historic  Chris¬ 
tianity.  To  the  last,  it  is  true,  some  differences  as 
to  the  larger  and  more  intractable  problems  of 
man’s  nature  in  relation  to  God  and  the  external 
world  may  be  expected  to  remain  among  Christians 
themselves.  There  can,  however,  be  no  question 
as  to  the  disintegrating  effects  of  time  and  advanc¬ 
ing  knowledge  on  the  peculiar  prepossessions  of  in¬ 
dividual  schools  of  thought  and  belief.  There  is  a 
tendency  arising  from  the  historical  antecedents  of 
Protestantism  to  undervalue  that  catholicity  of 
belief  which  must  undoubtedly  be  held  to  be  the 
normal  and  ultimate  condition  of  Christianity, 
answering  to  those  larger  speculations  on  the  con¬ 
tinuity  and  totality  of  human  history  which  Science 
now  opens  out  to  view.  The  corrective  to  this 
tendency  lies  in  a  truer  appreciation  of  the  essential 
spirit  of  Protestantism.1  Appealing  to  reason, 
without  renouncing  an  authoritative  standard,  and 

1  See  Mr.  PTou Ikes’  remarks,  Divisions  of  Christendom,  p.  195. 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY,  201 

to  private  judgment  fortified  by  the  verdict  of 
historical  inquiry,  its  standing-point  fits  it  expressly 
for  the  work  of  reconcilement  between  a  tradi¬ 
tional  faith  and  the  rationalizing  forces  of  progress. 
The  anarchy  of  criticism  which  marks  the  process 
of  severance  and  reunion  has  been  mistaken  by 
Comte 1  and  others  for  the  ultimate  issue  of  centuries 
of  unreasoning  credulity.  Protestantism,  it  is  as¬ 
serted  with  much  injustice,  has  made  no  converts, 
and  nowhere  enlarges  the  area  of  its  conquests.2 
Since  the  treaty  of  Westphalia,  it  is  said,  no  new 
territory  has  been  added  to  its  sway.  But  its  work 
lies  deeper,  and  must  be  traced  in  a  re-animation 
of  the  spiritual  vigour  of  Christianity,  in  a  general 
rehabilitation  of  its  beliefs,  and  in  re-arming  it  to 
meet  the  developments  of  increased  knowledge  and 

1  See  Phil.  Pos.,Y.  354.  “  L’esprit  d’ inconsequence,”  &c.  V.  299, 
327.  He  is  so  prejudiced  as  to  see  no  difference  between  Primitive 
Lutheranism  and  pure  Deism. 

2  Macaulay’s  remarks  are  well  known,  Essays,  pp.  352,  536  :  “  During 
these  two  hundred  and  fifty  years  Protestantism  has  made  no  conquests 
worth  speaking  of.  Nay,  we  believe  that,  as  far  as  there  has  been  a 
change,  that  change  has,  on  the  whole,  been  in  favour  of  the  Church  of 
Pome.”  So  also  Mr.  Lecky,  Hist.  Pat.,  I.  187,  who  adds,  “  Whatever  is 
lost  by  Catholicism  is  gained  by  Rationalism.”  The  same  writer,  how¬ 
ever,  in  another  passage  makes  this  important  admission,  “  Protestantism 
as  a  dogmatic  system  makes  no  converts,  but  it  has  shown  itself  capable 
of  blending  with  and  consecrating  the  prevailing  Rationalism.” — lb.,  II.  93. 
Prof.  Westcott  very  justly  observes,  “  However  imposing  the  apparent 
unity  of  the  religious  life  of  the  middle  ages  may  be,  it  cannot  be  ques¬ 
tioned  that  socially  and  individually  the  principles  of  Christianity  are 
more  powerful  now  than  then.  We  lose  the  sense  of  their  general 
action  in  the  variety  of  forms  through  which  they  work.” — Pont. 
Rev.,  VI.  416. 


Its  adapta¬ 
tion  to  the 
wants  of 
the  time. 


Its  true 
function. 


202 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  IV. 


Practical 
limits  to 
toleration 
of  opinion. 


advancing  civilization.  It,  at  least,  has  no  Syllabus 
to  retract,  no  Decrees  to  disannul.  Liable,  indeed, 
to  an  excess  of  critical  bias,  its  true  mean  lies  in  a 
spirit  which,  ever  ready  to  give  an  ansAver  of  its 
faith,  still  tempers  faith  with  charity,  and  enlarges 
to  the  utmost  the  bounds  of  agreement  in  belief ; 
“  made  all  things  to  all  men,”  if  by  any  means  some 
may  be  saved  ;  seeing  it  is  “  the  same  Spirit  of  Grod 
which  worketh  all  in  all.”  Doubtless  there  must 
arise  out  of  the  limitation  of  human  nature  itself  an 
ultimate  boundary  even  to  Christian  charity.  It 
seems  a  duty  to  44  mete  the  hounds  of  hate1  and 
love and  yet 

As  far  as  may  be  to  carve  out 
Free  space  for  every  human  doubt 
That  the  whole  mind  may  orb  about. 

It  seems  practically  impossible  to  grasp  truth, 
the  truth  of  sacred  things,  firmly  and  yet  not 
jealously ;  to  he  as  earnest  in  the  propagation  of 
right  belief  without  asserting  its  confession  to  be 
individually  necessary  to  salvation  as  with  such  a 
creed ;  to  hold  fast  the  convictions  of  personal 
assurance,  and  yet  to  recognize  that  to  all  it  is  not 
given  44  to  arrive  at  the  knowledge  of  the  truth.” 

1  Ps.  cxxxix.  21,  22 :  “  Do  not  I  (should  I  not)  hate  them,  0  Lord, 
that  hate  Thee  ?  .  .  .  I  hate  them  with  perfect  hatred.”  Dr.  Kay  iii 
his  note  on  this  passage  cites  Archbishop  Trench,  “  Hatred  of  evil, 
purely  as  evil,  is  eminently  a  Christian  grace,”  and  Dean  Stanley  (. Lect . 
on  J.  Ch.,  p.  253),  “  The  duty  of  keeping  alive  in  the  human  heart  the 
sense  of  burning  indignation  against  moral  evil,  against  selfishness, 
against  injustice,  against  untruth,  in  ourselves  as  well  as  in  others, — 
that  is  as  much  a  part  of  the  Christian  as  of  the  Jewish  dispensation.” 


Lect.  IV.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


203 


Yet  this  weakness  springs  really  from  a  want  of  faith.  Principle 

...  °f genuine 

Toleration,  if  it  is  not  to  be  indifference,  must  be  toleration, 
grounded  on  the  perception  of  counter-views  as 
necessarily  complementary  and  tending  to  establish 
the  ultimate  mean  of  truth.  Thus,  He  who  came 
among  men  to  found  “  the  everlasting  Gospel,” 
may  be  trusted  to  work  with  it  to  its  more  perfect 
reception,  according  to  the  light  and  knowledge 
of  the  time.  Only,  let  not  “  the  wrath  of  man  ” 
think  44  to  work  out  the  righteousness  of  God.”  hJp^sof 
Christianity  has  survived  revolutions  of  opinion,  ness- 
which,  beforehand,  might  not  unjustly  have  been 
deemed  fatal  to  it.  44  It  is  I :  be  not  afraid,”  is 
the  lesson  eternally  stamped  on  the  changes 
through  which  it  has  passed,  and  which  now,  if 
ever,  is  applicable  in  an  age  saturated  with  the 
idea  of  continuous  and  universal  development, 

44  stirring  all  science  to  its  very  depth,  and  revolu¬ 
tionizing  all  historical  literature.”  1  Such  a  pro¬ 
spect,  in  earlier  times,  may  be  thought  to  have 
offered  the  only  plausible  defence  of  persecution  of 
unbelief.  But  if  so,  it  is  valid  no  longer.  It  has  Chris- 
pleased  God,  by  the  teachings  of  experience,  to  power. a 
44  increase  our  faith.”  We  have  learned  to  believe 
in  the  Religion  of  Jesus  Christ,  not  as  an  abstract 
creed,  vulnerable  in  every  article  ;  not  as  44  the  law 
of  a  carnal  commandment,”  which  44  decayeth  and 

1  Lecky,  Hist.  Rat.,  I.  283.  “  Filiation  and  development,”  says 

M.  Littre,  Les  Barbares ,  p.  139,  “  constitute  the  essence  of  historjV’ 


204 


OBJECTIONS, ,  &c. 


[Lect.  IV. 


waxeth  old ;  ”  but  as  a  power,1  regenerative  of  our 

race,  subtle  and  continuous  as  the  agencies  of 

nature,  “the  power  of  an  endless  life.”  Faith  is 

reassured;  we  are  no  longer  “ashamed  of  the 

Gospel  of  Christ ;  ”  for  it  is  “  the  power  of  God 

unto  salvation  to  everv  one  that  belie veth.” 

«/ 

1  Compare  the  opening  reflections  of  Neander,  Ch.  Iiist.,  I.  p.  2. 
C.  Schwarz,  Gesch.  der  neuesten  Theologie,  p.  43,  criticises  unduly  this 
view  of  Neander,  who,  he  says,  has  given  accordingly  a  history  of 
piety,  not  of  the  Church. 


LECTURE  V, 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

CONSIDERED . 


“  Naturam  hominis  hanc  Dens  esse  voluit,  lit  duarum  rerum  cupidus 
et  appetens  esset,  religionis  et  sapientia?.  Sed  homines  ideo  falluntur, 
quod  aut  religionem  suscipiunt,  omissa  sapientia ;  aut  sapientia3  soli 
student,  omissa  religione ;  cum  alterum  sine  altero  esse  non  possit 
verum.” — Lactantius. 

“  Meantime  it  seemed  as  if  mankind  in  Europe,  and  especially  in 
England  and  France,  had  now  for  the  first  time  opened  its  eyes  to 
Nature  and  to  its  strict  conformity  with  law  :  and  they  who  yielded 
themselves  unreservedly  to  this  tendency  more  and  more  lost  sight  of 
the  independence  and  existence  of  spirit.” — Dorner,  Hist.  Prot.  Theol.y 
II.  258. 


LECTURE  V. 


“  There  is  a  spirit  in  man  :  and  the  inspiration  of  the  Almighty 
giveth  them  understanding .” — Jfcffi  tjcjru.  8. 

§  i .  T  T  is  urged  by  some  who  look  on  Christianity  Objections 

i  .  to  the 

A  as  a  bygone  or  a  transient  creed,  that  not  method  of 
only  are  the  results  of  scientific  inquiry  formidable  as  being 
to  the  reception  of  orthodoxy  in  detail ;  its  method  tive.mduc’ 
also  is  aggressive,  incompatible  with  the  stand¬ 
point  of  theological  beliefs.  Inductive  science  rests 
essentially  on  the  basis  of  individual  and  specific 
experience,  on  methodized  observation.  Its  reason¬ 
ing  is  that  of  common  sense  and  common  life.  It 
appeals  only  to  matters  of  fact.  It  is,  therefore, 
from  first  to  last,1  from  principle  to  conclusion, 
from  the  first  individual  instance  examined  to  the 
latest  universal  law  registered  for  future  inquiry, 
within  reach,  so  to  speak ;  patent  to  sense,  and  Popular 

tii  •  r  •  demand 

liable  to  verification.  “  The  man  of  science,”  says  foryenfi- 

^  coition 

Professor  Huxley,2  “  has  learned  to  believe  in 
justification,  not  by  faith  but  by  verification.” 

Such  a  method  has  in  it  nothing  transcendental, 
nothing  superstitious,  nothing  supernatural.  More¬ 
over,  it  has  on  its  side,  it  is  said,  the  results  of 

1  Compare  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  IV.  697-9. 

2  Lay  Sermons ,  p.  22.  Mr.  Matthew  Arnold  remarks,  that  “  the 
licence  of  affirmation  about  God  and  His  proceedings  in  which  the  reli¬ 
gious  world  indulge,  is  more  and  more  met  by  the  demand  for  verifica¬ 
tion.” — S.  Paul  and  Protestantism. 


208 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  V- 


Reasons  time  and  experience.  Former  ages  have  gone 

bringvery  wrong  in  proportion  as  they  have  abandoned  or 
commonly  faqe(j  to  reCognize  the  truth  of  the  inductive 

tained,  spirit.  It  is  now  on  all  hands  welcomed ;  and  the 
era  of  its  triumphs  has  begun.  But  Theology,  it  is 
urged,  alone  refuses  to  be  brought  within  its  sway. 
Its  information  flows  from  another  source.  “  In 
Theology,1  certain  principles  are  taken  for  granted; 
and,  it  being  deemed  impious  to  question  them,  all 
that  remains  is,  to  reason  from  them  downward. 
The  general  truths  which  bind  up  and  enwrap  its 
conclusions,  are  the  gift  of  anterior  Revelation. 
They  cannot  be  substantiated  by  facts,  and  are 
accepted  with  an  unreasoning  assent.  For  Re¬ 
ligion,  u  taking  its  ground  on  the  first  conclusions 
obtained  in  the  process  of  human  reflection,  thence¬ 
forth  obstinately  defends  what  it  holds  to  be  Divine 
and  Theo-  revelations.  But  the  supposed  revelations  inevi- 
Science"1  tably  come  into  collision  with  new  ideas  and 
tobeSdiald  experiences  to  which  Science  alone  can  afford  to 
oppoled17  a  bearing.” 3  Thus,  while  Science  is  the 

result  of  inquiry,  Theology  is  bred  of  faith ;  its 
theory  precedes  experience  and  controls  it.  In 


1  M.  Guizot,  Civil,  en  France ,  II.  385,  points  out  how  early  this 
conflict  arose  between  the  scientific  spirit  and  theological  deduction, 
when  remarking  on  the  Neo-Platonism  of  Alexandria,  and  the  kindred 
views  in  medieval  times  of  Scotus  Erigena.  Mr.  Mackay,  Rise  and 
Progress  of  Christianity ,  p.  288,  prefers  to  deduce  the  existing  dualism 
of  Theology  and  Science  from  the  Nominalism  of  Occam. 

2  See  Mr.  Buckle  at  length,  Hist.  Civ .,  III.  282-3,  464. 

3  See  Mr.  Mackay,  u.  s.,  pp.  270-1. 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


209 


the  one,  doubt,  scepticism,  originality,  aptness  to 
discover,  are  virtues  and  the  highest  of  duties. 
In  the  other,  originality  is  the  parent  of  heresy, 
and  therefore  a  crime.  Thus  in  Christianity  it  is 
an  accepted  principle  that  66  there  can  be  no  con¬ 
cerning  truth  which  is  not  ancient ;  and  whatso¬ 
ever  is  truly  new,  is  certainly  false.”  1  Or,  as  it 
has  been  said,  “  That  is  true  which  is  first,  that  is 
false  which  is  after.”  Faith  becomes  thus  an  in¬ 
dispensable  duty,  and  credulity  an  honour.  “  It  is 
impossible  to  establish  the  old  theological  premisses 
by  a  chain  of  inductive  reasoning.”  2 

§  2.  I  have  quoted  objections  which  show  pretty 
clearly  the  current  of  thought  which  is  at  present 
setting  in  on  the  relations  of  Theology  to  Science. 
In  replying  to  them,  I  shall  not  now  stay  to  prove 
that  a  fitting  measure  of  scientific  scepticism  (a 
term,  however,  covering  very  opposite  meanings), 
is  by  no  means  out  of  place  in  the  elements  of 
a  religious  philosophy.  It  was  a  theologian3  to 


1  Bp.  Pearson,  Expos,  of  Creed ,  dedication.  Tin’s  corresponds  to  the 
maxim  of  Vincentius  Lirin.,  “  Dum  nove  dicitur,  non  dicantur  nova.” 

2  Mr.  Bnclde,  III.  283. 

3  Archbishop  Leighton,  thus  declaring  himself  a  Cartesian.  The 

noble  maxims,  “  Intellcctum  valde  ama”;  “  Fides  qmerens  intel- 
lectum,”  are  worthy  of  the  brightest  age  of  culture.  For  the  meanings 
and  history  of  Scepticism,  see  Dr.  Farrar,  Bampt.  L.,  592-3.  “  The 

best  Christian  in  the  world,”  said  Shaftesbury,  Works ,  III.  72,  “  who, 
being  destitute  of  the  means  of  certainty,  depends  only  on  history  and 
tradition  for  his  belief,  is  at  best  but  a  sceptic-Christian.”  “  Scep¬ 
ticism,”  writes  Bishop  Harvey  Goodwin,  “  implies  only  that  a  man 
is  determined  to  look  into  matters  for  himself ;  not  to  trust  every 
assertion,  not  to  repeat  a  parrot-creed.”  Leibnitz’s  golden  rule  must  be 

P 


Scepticism 
(rightly 
Under¬ 
stood)  not 
incom¬ 
patible 
with  a 
religious 
philo¬ 
sophy. 


210 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  V. 


Distinc¬ 
tion  be¬ 
tween  pri¬ 
mary  and 
inferred 
truths  in 
religion. 


The  latter 
frequently 
obtained 
by  induc¬ 
tion. 


whom  we  owe  the  remark,  u  that  men  that  know 
nothing  in  sciences  have  no  doubts.”  That  during 
certain  periods  in  the  history  of  the  Church  belief 
was  held  meritorious  in  proportion  to  the  doubt¬ 
fulness  of  the  subject,  is  perhaps  true  ;x  but  it  was 
not  so  from  the  beginning.  It  will,  however, 
probably  be  admitted  that  truths  of  Religion  are 
of  two  kinds,  primary  or  inferred,  principles  or 
conclusions.  The  latter  have  certainly  been  ob¬ 
tained  by  reasoning,  and  reasoning  not  neces¬ 
sarily  of  one  kind.  The  theology  of  the  Reformers, 
for  example,  showed  that  careful  inductive  exami¬ 
nation  into  the  sources  and  history  of  doctrines,  the 
facts  of  our  religion,  and  the  contents  of  the  Bible, 
is  in  no  wise  alien  to  the  spirit  of  the  Christian 
faith.2  The  same  spirit  has  survived  and  domi¬ 
nated  later  controversies,  and  is  at  this  very  hour 
invading  the  precincts  of  Catholicism.  But  not 
only  so.  The  records  of  our  faith,  their  genuine- 


borne  in  mind :  “  II  faut  prendre  garde  de  ne  jamais  abandonner  les 
verites  necessaires  et  eternelles  pour  soutenir  les  mysteres  ;  de  peur  que 
les  ennSmis  de  la  religion  ne  prennent  droit  la-dessus  de  decrier  et  la 
religion  et  les  mysteres.”  “  Religious  disbelief  and  philosophical  scep¬ 
ticism  are  not  merely  not  the  same,  but  have  no  natural  connection.” — 
Sir  AV.  Hamilton,  Led.,  I.  394. 

1  Compare  Milman,  Lat.  Christ .,  I.  439. 

2  Hence  the  historical  labours  of  the  Magdeburg  Centuriators ,  and 
Selden’s  famous  saying,  that  “  the  text  1  Search  the  Scriptures  ’  had  set 
the  world  in  uproar.”  It  would  be  interesting  to  inquire  how  far  the 
impulse  was  thus  given  to  inductive  tendencies  which  culminated  in 
the  Baconian  method.  On  the  rule  and  practice  of  an  “  Inductive 
Exposition,”  Isaac  Taylor,  Hist.  Enthusiasm ,  p.  314,  grounds  his 
expectation  of  the  reunion  of  all  Protestant  bodies. 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


21 1 


ness,  authenticity,  and  even  inspiration,  the  value 
of  the  manuscripts  on  which  they  rest,  and  of  the 
testimonies  by  which  they  are  supported,  all  such 
points  lie  open  to  inductive  instruments  of  inquiry  ; 
and  these  are  being'  more  and  more  largely  em¬ 
ployed  by  the  ablest  theologians  of  the  day.  And 
if  this  be  true  in  the  case  of  the  Sacred  Volume, 
which  in  whatever  measure  conveys  the  Word  of 
Grod,  it  is  still  more  true  in  respect  of  doctrines 1 
dependent  for  their  authority  on  the  practice  and 
common  tradition  of  the  Church.  Here  at  least 
the  conclusions  at  issue,  affecting  the  hereditary 
standing  of  opinions  and  usages,  are  within  the 
range  of  historical  inquiry ;  that  is,  of  a  science 
of  observation,  and  are  of  a  tentative  character. 

In  its  inferential  portion,  then,  Theology  nowhere  Theology 
refuses  to  accept  the  ascending  road  of  a  patient 
and  rigorous  induction.  It  stands  on  the  same  foot  dim?*' 
with  other  branches  ot  historical  criticism.  And 
to  turn  to  the  principles  (for  Christian  dogmas 
have  been  properly  termed  the  principles  of  Theo¬ 
logical  Science  on  which,  as  upon  axioms,  the 
caidmal  truths  of  our  Heligion  must  finally  turn), 

y  described  as  the  products  of  un¬ 
reasoning  acceptance,  even  if  they  have  some  reaching 
analogy2  with  the  maxims  or  conventional  ultimata  primary 

truths. 

See  Mr.  Ffoulkes  remarks,  Divisions  of  Christendom,  p.  196. 

This  is  the  view  of  Bacon,  Augm.  Sc.,  IX.  i.  “  In  rebus  naturalibus 

ipsa  principia  examini  subjiciuntur . aliter  fit  in  religione  ;  ubi 

et  primm  piopositiones  authypostatf©  snnt  atcpie  per  se  subsistentes  5 

p  2 


212 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  V. 


Employ¬ 
ment  of 
natural 
analogy 


of  legal  and  political  science  ?  As  dependent  on 
facts  received  upon  testimony  and  observation, 
they  stand  on  historical  evidence  open  to  inductive 
inquiry.  Christianity  indeed,  as  an  historic  religion, 
has  in  this  respect  specific  claims  upon  a  Positive 
school  of  thought.1  Miraculous  and  portentous 
events,  it  has  never  been  denied,  must  be  subjected 
to  this  test,  and  stand  or  fall  by  its  verdict,  so 
that  the  latest  assaults  upon  these  have  been 
directed  to  the  end  of  discrediting  any  amount  of 
testimony  which  may  be  brought  on  their  behalf. 
The  tendencies  of  human  nature,  it  is  held,  in  a 
credulous  age  are  more  than  sufficient  to  account 
for  the  result.2  Nor  when  the  facts  of  the  Sciip- 
tural  narrative  have  been  adequately  attested,  are 
its  doctrines  altogether  exempt  from  the  processes 
of  a  positive  method.  The  analogy  of  Nature  may 
be  employed  m  attacking  or  m  defending  them. 
This  line  of  argument  may  be  applied  within  some 
extent  even  to  those  conceptions  of  the  Divine 

et  rursus  non  reguntur  ab  ill&  ratione  qua?  propositiones  consequents 
deducit.  Neque  tamen  hoc  fit  in  religione  sol&,  sed  etiam  in  alns 
scientiis,  tam  gravioribus  quam  levioribus :  ubi  scilicet  propositiones 
primarise  placita  sunt,  non  posita;  siquidem  et  in  illis  rationis  usus 
absolutus  esse  non  potest.” 

1  Compare  Prof.  Westcott’s  remarks  in  Cont.  Bev.,  VIII.  373.  He 
infers  that  there  is  no  fundamental  antagonism  between  the  Positive 
method  and  Christianity  ;  and  that  the  former  is  no  lasting  religious 
power,  but  a  transitional  preparation  for  a  fuller  faith. 

2  Bishop  Butler’s  warning  is  here  of  importance  “  The  credulity 
of  mankind  is  acknowledged :  and  the  suspicions  of  mankind  ought  to 
be  acknowledged  too;  and  their  backwardness  even  to  believe,  and 
greater  still  to  practise  what  makes  against  their  inteiest. 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


213 


Nature  on  which  the  Christian  system  rests.  It 
is  sufficient  to  overthrow  the  objection,  otherwise 
a  plausible  one,  that  in  accepting  a  scheme  of 
Revelation,  we  are  but  hallowing  the  creations 
of  the  human  intellect  —  notions  which,  being 


limited,  cannot  but  be  inadequate  and  mislead¬ 
ing  ;  thus,  as  it  were,  “  sacrificing  to  our  net,  and 
burning  incense  to  our  drag.”  Again  the  facts  in  ^fctl0°[cal 
regard  of  human  nature  and  of  human  history  evidence, 
which  the  system  of  Christianity  assumes,  and  to 
which  it  addresses  itself,  are  capable  of  inde¬ 
pendent  proof  or  disproof;  and  this  of  an  experi¬ 
mental  kind.  For  the  field  of  experience  is  not 
confined  to  material  nature.1  The  existence  and 
validity  of  conscience,  the  facts  of  its  testimony 
to  spiritual  truth,  the  existence  and  nature  of  the 
spiritual  element  in  man,  its  inherent  instincts,  its 
unconscious  but  indubitable  witness  to  the  need  0f  obser- 

V  ft  L 1  ()  11 


1  See  Dr.  Mozley’s  powerful  remarks  in  Cont.  Rev .,  VII.  4S4.  I 
cannot  refrain  from  quoting  the  following  fine  application  of  this  mode 
of  reasoning : — “  When,  in  reviewing  the  history  of  the  past,  you  find 
certain  ideas  arising  in  the  first  known  period  of  the  life  of  humanity 
and  co-existent  with  it :  undergoing  transformation  from  epoch  to 
epoch  :  but  remaining  always  and  everywhere  essentially  the  same,  and 
inseparable  from  human  society,  gathering  renewed  strength  from  every 
social  upheaval  destructive  of  the  temporary  ideas  of  a  single  people,  or 
a  single  epoch  :  when  on  interrogating  your  own  conscience  in  supreme 
moments  of  deep  affection,  sacred  sorrow,  or  devotion  to  duty,  you  find 
within  your  hearts  an  echo  answering  to  the  ideas  transmitted  by  the 
ages ;  those  ideas  are  true,  are  innate  in  humanity,  and  are  destined  to 
accompany  its  onward  progress.  .  .  .  God,  immortality,  duty,  the 
moral  law  sole  sovereign  .  .  .  are  ideas  of  this  order.” — Mazzini  in  Cont. 
Rev.,  XX.  161. 


214 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  V. 


and  ex¬ 
periment. 


Of  ex¬ 
planation 
and  verifi¬ 
cation. 


of  Revelation,  and  to  the  subject-matter  of  its 
announcements ;  these  cannot  be  characterized  as 
deductions  from  any  a  priori  system,  but  rather 
as  matters  of  fact,  and  not  of  probability,  of  im¬ 
mediate  experience  less  remote,  indeed,  than  the 
proofs  of  external  phenomena.1  Crucial  instances 
and  a  doctrine  of  averages  are  not  excluded  from 
the  treatment  of  them.  Theology  refuses  certainly 
with  scientific  sternness  to  admit  “  that  Religion 2 
is  to  each  individual  according  to  the  inward  light 
wherewith  he  is  endowed,”  or  that  “  it  consists 
essentially  in  an  adaptation  to  the  characters,  ideas, 
and  institutions  of  those  who  profess  it.”  Such 
an  assumption  would  be  as  fatal  to  its  own  validity 
as  the  admission  of  a  sophistical  psychology  has 
shown  itself  in  the  history  of  philosophy.  It 
confesses,  however,  the  constraint  of  adequate  and 
properly  unexceptionable  generalizations 3  both  as 
regards  individual  experiences,  and  general  results. 
Thus  it  yields  an  experimental  explanation  of  some 


1  So  J.  P.  Richter  observes,  Selina  (Works,  XXXIII.  223),  that  the 
soul  or  mind  is  more  evident  and  certain  to  me  than  my  body  :  for  only 
by  it  can  I  know  and  feel  the  body.  A  similar  idea  occurs  in  Augustin. 
d.  Genesi  ad  litt.,  V.  xvi.,  “  God  is  nearer,  more  related  to  us,  and 
therefore  more  easily  known  to  us,  than  sensible,  corporeal  things.” 

2  Buckle,  Hist.  Civ.,  III.  477. 

3  In  inductive  logic  every  exception  should  admit  of  separate  ex¬ 
planation,  and  so  “  prove  the  rule.”  But  “  the  natural-history-sciences,” 
remarks  Dr.  Rolleston,  “  do  not  usually  admit  of  the  strictness  which 
says  that  an  exception,  so  far  from  proving  a  rule,  proves  it  to  be  a  bad 
one.” — Address  before  the  British  Assoc.,  1870,  p.  14.  The  same  limit 
may  accordingly  be  allowed  as  to  generalizations  of  moral  and  spiritual 
facts. 


215 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

ultimate  questions  to  which  Metaphysic  from  its 
speculative  character  furnishes  no  abiding  solution. 

§  3.  Theology,  as  we  have  seen,  has  been  at-J^.^* 
tacked,  and  its  progressive  capacities  disparaged,  method 
on  the  score  of  its  being  essentially  deductive.1 
Such  a  criticism  is,  however,  conceived  in  a  narrow 
spirit.  So  far  as  it  is  true,  it  proves  nothing  against 
the  general  credibility  of  its  doctrines,  for  it  would 
not  be  contended  that  there  is  anything  in  the 
nature  of  demonstration,  as  such,  vicious  or  erro¬ 
neous.  Deduction,  as  a  mode  of  proof,  where  its 
premisses  are  not  hastily  or  arbitrarily  assumed, 
presents  a  scientific  method  more  perfect,  because 
more  truly  natural  than  any  other.  “In  itself ^einduc~ 
more  perfect,”  says  Hume,  “  it  suits  less  the  imper¬ 
fection  of  human  nature,  and  is  hence  a  common 
source  of  illusion  and  mistake.”2  Accordingly,  it 
is  very  generally  admitted  that  the  progress  of 
Natural  Science  trends  in  this  direction.3  But 

1  Thus  even  Whewell,  Bridgew.  Tr .,  III.  v.  vi.,  and  Indie,  of  a 
Creator ,  p.  45,  considers  it  a  matter  of  fact  that  inductive  philosophers 
have  readily  recognized  an  intelligent  Author  of  Nature,  where  deductive 
rcasoners  have  failed  to  do  so.  Mr.  Lecky,  II.  I.  21 A,  II.  205,  holds 
that  “  the  growth  of  an  inductive  and  scientific  spirit  is  invariably 
hostile  to  theological  interests.”  He  afterwards  apparently  limits  this 
to  Catholicism. 

2  Assays,  IV.  i.  Liebig,  in  his  criticism  of  Bacon,  remarks :  “  In  der 
Naturwissenschaft  ist  alle  Forschung  deduktiv  oder  aprioriscli :  das 
Experiment  ist  nur  Hiilfsmittel  fur  den  Denkprocess.”  —  ap.  Lange, 

Qesch.  des  Materialismus ,  p.  349. 

3  “  A  revolution,”  writes  Mr.  J.  S.  Mill,  “  is  peaceably  and  pro¬ 
gressively  effecting  itself  in  philosophy,  the  reverse  of  that  to  which 
Bacon  has  attached  his  name.  .  .  .  Deduction  is  the  great  scientific 
work  of  the  present  and  of  future  ages.” — Logic ,  I.  579-80. 


21 6 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  V, 


and  more 
suited  to 
the  ulti¬ 
mate  con¬ 
dition  of 
science. 


however  this  be,  in  deduction  we  recognize  an  in¬ 
strument  of  science,  an  ideal  type  of  knowledge,  of 
at  least  co-ordinate  authority,  sanctioned  alike  with 
its  rival  method  by  the  constitution  of  the  human 
mind ;  a  type  antecedent  perhaps  in  nature  and 
validity,  and  certainly  more  suited  to  the  final  rela¬ 
tions  of  Knowledge  and  Being.  Now,  the  subject- 
matter  of  Revelation  cannot  but  be  final  in  its  cha¬ 


racter,  incapable  of  subsequent  variation  or  revision. 
The  gift  of  the  “Father  of  lights,”  it  “  knows  no 
Theology  variableness,  neither  shadow  of  turning:.”  No  suc- 

necessanly  ° 

final  in  its  ceeding  announcements  can  from  the  nature  of  the 

character.  ^ 

case  contradict  the  principles  which  it  proclaims  or 
implies.  Nor  can  the  ultimate  posture  of  things 
fail  to  be  in  agreement  with  what  has  been  thus 
previously  declared  of  the  Divine  administration. 
The  employment,  therefore,  of  deduction  in  Reli¬ 
gion,  as  a  specific  department  of  knowledge,  is  not 
properly  liable  to  exception,  even  were  this,  which 
it  is  not,  a  solitary  example  of  its  application. 
Now,  the  test  of  the  deductive  stage  of  a  science 
(and  perhaps  of  all  Science  in  the  strict  usage  of 
the  term)  is  the  capacity  of  inferring  from  primary 
and  fundamental  conceptions  a  mediate  system  of 


mrXgoiiT trutlls-  SPace  and  Numerical  magnitude  are  at 
of  prfmary  once  rec°gnized  ideas  of  this  fruitful  character.1 

1  See  some  very  able  remarks  on  this  subject  in  the  Christian  Re¬ 
membrancer,  No.  CXXXI.,  p.  230;  and  compare  Prof.  Westcott,  Cont. 
Rev.,  VI1T.  378,  on  the  narrowness  of  the  purely  scientific  view, 
isolating  and  excluding  Religion. 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


217 


Such,  also,  are  our  notions  of  Grod  and  the  human 
Soul,  when  the  further  conception  is  added  of  an 
accessory  revelation.  For  it  needed  something 
more  than  the  mere  action  of  man’s  mind  to  “  bring 
life  and  immortality  to  light.”  But  the  Christian 
ideas  of  the  character  and  work  of  the  Divine  Being 
as  the  Father,  Redeemer,  and  Sanctifier  of  mankind, 
once  given,  (even  as  the  chief  links  in  the  colliga¬ 
tion  of  scientific  notions  have  ever  flashed  into  the 
minds  of  discoverers  by  a  power  confessedly  beyond 
the  teaching  of  method,  ‘  a  vision  and  a  faculty 
divine’),1  the  legitimate  inferences  are  the  property 
of  logical  reflection,  and  can  be  tested  by  applica¬ 
tion  to  the  facts  of  man’s  nature  and  circumstances, 
as  the  verifications  of  Natural  Laws  already  sur¬ 
mised  are  obtained  from  the  inspection  of  instances.2 

4 

This  constitutes  the  appropriate  evidence  of  truths 
received  at  the  first  “  neither  of  man,  nor  after 
man,  but  by  the  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ.” 

§  4.  But  Religion,  it  is  said,  impedes  knowledge 

1  So  Tennyson  speaks  of — 

The  fair  new  forms 

That  float  about  the  threshold  of  an  age, 

Like  truths  of  science  waiting  to  be  caught. 

2  Hence  Mr.  Fairbairn  remarks,  Immortality  of  the  Soul ,  Cont.  Iiev ., 
XX.  29,  that  “  Religion,  or  rather  its  philosophic  theology,  may  now 
become  a  science  as  purely  inductive  as  any  of  the  physical  sciences. 
The  now  possible  analysis  of  the  faiths  of  the  world,  if  accompanied  by 
a  searching  analysis  of  the  faculties  of  the  mind,  will  hand  over  to 
thought  our  primary  and  necessary  religious  ideas,  which,  as  ultimate 
religious  truths,  constitute  in  their  synthesis  the  foundation  of  the 
universal  and  ideal  Religion  of  man.” 


and  col¬ 
ligation  of 
ideas. 


Objection 
to  the  truth 
of  theology 
as  being 
stationary 
and  re¬ 
actionary. 


21 8 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  V. 


Revela¬ 
tion,  in 
what  sense 
final, 


but  admit¬ 
ting  of 
indefinite 
applica¬ 
tion 


by  leading  men  to  be  satisfied  with  an  easy  belief, 
and  by  making  inquiry  a  crime.  All  progress  is 
in  this  manner  barred,  and  there  arises  a  marked 
and  singular  exception  to  the  aggressive  spirit  of 
all  other  branches  of  knowledge.  An  essential  in¬ 
compatibility  emerges  between  a  stationary  faith 
and  a  progressive  philosophy.  No  doubt,  we 
reply,  it  is  beyond  human  power  to  add  to  the 
subject-matter  of  Revelation,  though  clearer  light 
may,  in  the  course  of  ages,  be  thrown  upon  its 
obscurer  regions.  It  may,  in  this  view,  be  com¬ 
pared  to  all  great  and  organic  truths,  making  up 
the  stock  of  true  human  knowledge,  and  consti¬ 
tuting  a  deposit  of  belief  handed  on  to  succeeding 
generations.  Once  discovered,  these  are  not  again 
lost  in  the  history  of  culture,  but  become  the  ina¬ 
lienable  heritage  of  the  race  in  its  progress  to  fuller 
knowledge.1  But  the  application  of  Revealed  Truth 
to  the  circumstances  of  human  history,  its  practical 
developments  in  living  actual  results,  its  inherent 
and  unsuspected  activity,  its  conformity  with  un¬ 
known  powers,  and,  it  may  be,  principles  of  human 
nature ;  these  and  other  considerations  supply  a 
field  for  the  enlargement  of  our  acquaintance  with 
the  meaning  and  potential  character  of  Christianity 


1  Macaulay,  indeed,  Essays,  pp.  536,  537,  argues  at  length  that  we 
have  no  security  for  the  future  against  the  prevalence  of  any  theological 
error  that  has  ever  prevailed  in  time  past.  Such  a  view  deprives  Religion 
of  all  benefit  from  contemporary  light  in  other  subjects  of  thought,  which, 
if  only  free  access  be  allowed,  cannot  fail  to  affect  existing  religious 
opinion. 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


219 


as  a  scheme  of  Revelation,  which  admits  of  endless 
advance  and  indefinite  augmentation.  “  It  is  not 
at  all  incredible,”  writes  Bishop  Butler,1  speaking 
of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  “  that  a  book  which  has  been 
so  long  in  the  possession  of  mankind  should  contain 
many  truths  as  yet  undiscerned.  For  all  the  same 
phenomena  and  the  same  faculties  of  investigation 
from  which  such  great  discoveries  in  natural 
knowledge  have  been  made  in  the  present  and  last 
age,  were  equally  in  the  possession  of  mankind 
several  thousand  years  before.”  So  too,  the  ulti¬ 
mate  verification,  and  even,  perhaps,  enlargement 
of  this  scheme  by  the  facts  of  Science  (which  also 
has  its  revelations  for  mankind,)  is  a  continually 
growing  addition  to  the  bulk  of  human  knowledge. 
In  this  view  Christianity  must  not  be  denied  the 
place  even  of  a  progressive  science.2  The  laws  of 

1  Analogy ,  II.  c.  iii.  “  It  is  true,  indeed,”  writes  Mr.  Rogers,  Essays , 
II.  335,  “  that  theology  cannot  be  said  to  admit  of  unlimited  progress  in 
tlie  same  sense  as  chemistry,  which  may,  for  aught  we  know,  treble  or 
quadruple  its  present  accumulations,  vast  as  they  are,  both  in  bulk  and 
importance.  But  even  in  theology,  as  deduced  from  the  Scripture, 
minute  Iragments  of  new  truth  or  more  exact  adjustments  of  old  truth 
may  be  perpetually  expected.”  Dean  Stanley,  Serm.  on  the  Bible,  p.  112, 
writes,  “  Fever  before  our  own  age  has  there  been  so  keen,  so  dis¬ 
criminating  a  perception  of  the  peculiarities  (if  I  may  so  speak),  the 
essential,  innermost,  distinguishing  marks  of  the  unapproached  and 
unapproachable  Character  described  to  us  in  the  Four  Gospels.  We 
have  not  arrived  at  the  end  of  it.  Far  from  it.  In  the  very  fact  of 
the  laige  tiaits  of  His  life  and  character  which  still  remain  unexplored, 
lies  a  boundless  hope  for  the  future.” 

.  Compare  Butler,  Anal.,  II.  iii.  “As  it  is  owned  the  whole  scheme  of 
Scrip tuie  is  not  yet  understood  ;  so  if  it  ever  comes  to  be  understood, 

•  .  .  it  must  be  in  the  same  way  that  natural  knowledge  is  come  at  by 
the  continuance  and  progress  of  learning  and  of  liberty,”  &c.  See  some 
remarks  by  Dorner,  Hist.  Prot.  Th.,  II.  4. 


and  verifi¬ 
cation, 
adding  to 
the  bulk 
of  know¬ 
ledge. 


220 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  V. 


Chris¬ 
tianity,  in 
what  sense 
a  progres¬ 
sive 
science, 


and  a 
theory  of 
develop¬ 
ment  ad¬ 
missible. 


natural  development  apply  to  its  enouncements 
equally  with  those  of  other  departments  of  truth. 
The  realization  of  66  things  not  seen  as  yet  , 
ulterior  applications  of  acknowledged  principles 
and  promises  \  the  laying  aside  mheiited  pieposses- 
sions  antagonistic  to  the  genius  of  our  Religion,  and 
from  which  the  truth  alone,  when  more  and  more 
reflected  on  and  assimilated,  can  set  man’s  spirit 
free  ;l  these  are  lands  in  the  realm  of  Christian 
thought  perhaps  yet  unexplored,  and,  certainly,  not 
yet  taken  into  possession.  The  gradual  evolution 
of  fundamental  ideas,  the  discovery  of  new  rela¬ 
tions  involved  in  them,  and  new  spheres  in  which 
they  are  valid  ;  these  are  elements  of  progress  in¬ 
herent  and  permanent.  Such  an  advance  in  no 
way,  indeed,  impairs  the  final  character  of  Christian 
truth  as  Revealed.2  And  yet  in  this  manner,  side 


1  On  admissible  developments  of  doctrine  in  Christianity,  see  Archer 
Butler  ( Letters,  pp.  55-8).  Dr.  Newman’s  well-known  “  Theory  ”  is  an 
attempted  solution  of  an  admitted  fact.  See  also  De  Qumcey’s  Essay  on 
Protestantism,  at  length. 

2  In  quitting  this  part  of  the  subject  I  am  anxious  once  more  to  insist 
on  tlie  necessity  of  a  fixed  and  primitive  standard  of  doctrine.  It  is  one 
thing  to  hold  with  Bp.  Law  ( Theory  of  Religion,  p.  145)  that  “  though 
the  whole  scheme  of  our  redemption  was  completely  delivered,  and  all 
its  essential  parts  recorded  during  the  extraordinary  assistance  and 
inspection  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  in  some  respects  the  primitive  Chris¬ 
tians  seem  to  have  the  advantage  of  others ;  ....  yet  it  by  no  means 
follows  that  the  true  genius,  import,  and  extent  of  this  revelation  must 
be  as  well  understood  by  the  generality  of  them  as  it  could  be  by  any 
that  came  after  them.”  It  is  another  to  proclaim  with  Channing 
(Letter  on  Creeds)  that  “the  wisest  theologians  are  children  who  have 
caught  but  faint  glimpses  of  the  religion  ;  who  have  taken  but  their  first 
lessons,  and  whose  business  it  is  to  ‘grow  in  the  knowledge  of  Jesus 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


221 


by  side  with  physical  studies  and  philosophical 
deductions,  Christian  Science  may  still  climb  the 
starry  heights  of  Thought  and  Being,  and  draw 
ever  nearer  the  eternal  springs  of  Intuitive  Truth. 

§  5.  When  the  wondrous  fertility  of  the  present 
era  in  discovery  and  information,  physical  and 
historical,  is  taken  into  account,  undoubtedly  a 
certain  alarm  lays  hold  of  the  religious  mind, 
lest  the  advance  of  positive  Knowledge,  and  our 
familiarity  with  the  facts  of  Nature,  should  leave 
no  room  for  the  fears  and  hopes  of  a  world  unseen. 
The  very  difficulties  for  which  Religion  undertakes 
to  account  may,  it  seems,  after  all,  disappear. 
Explanations  of  Laws  of  Nature  may  take  the  place 
of  yearnings  of  heart  and  soul  after  the  Ineffable 
and  the  Divine.  Dim,  ambiguous  issues  may  be 
discounted  for  present  certainty  and  immediate 
enjoyment.  May  it  not  be  wiser  to  enjoy  the 
pleasures  of  sense  for  a  season  ?  Fatalism  may  be 
found  to  extinguish  the  terrors  of  wounded  con¬ 
sciences  ;  and  the  utterances  of  Inspiration  may  be 
analyzed  into  vulgar  errors  and  unmeaning  super- 


Christ.’  Need  I  say  how  hostile  to  this  growth  is  a  fixed  creed ,  "beyond 
which  we  must  never  wander  ?  &c.”  It  needs  hardly  to  be  pointed  out  that 
the  theory  (of  Hegel,  Baur,  &c.)  which  regards  Christianity  itself  as  a 
development  in  the  history  of  Universal  Religion,  a  phase  in  the  evolu¬ 
tion  of  the  Universal  Geist,  and  capable  accordingly  of  a  specific  perfec¬ 
tibility's  wholly  beside  our  present  point  of  view.  So  M.  Comte  looks 
on  the  present  form  of  Christianity  as  the  last  and  highest  type  of 
Monotheism,  including  within  itself  the  characteristic  elements  of  all 
the  preparatory  developments,  and  due  to  them. 


Practical 
alarms 
from  the 
collision  of 
natural 
knowledge 
with  reve¬ 
lation 


222 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  V. 


and  of  ma¬ 
terialistic 
opinions. 


Their 
effect  upon 
a  belief  in 
immor¬ 
tality. 


stitions.  And  certainly,  if  it  can  be  shown  that  in 
the  universe  of  things  all  is  material,1  and  bound 
by  Laws  of  Matter ;  that  Life  itself  is  but  a  trick 
of  force ;  that  the  realm  of  the  Invisible,  of  Him 
“  Who  dwelleth  in  the  light  to  which  no  man  can 
approach,  Whom  no  man  hath  seen,  neither  can 
see,”  is  baseless,  fictitious,  inappreciable ;  who  shall 
fathom  the  sadness  which  should  brood  over  heart 
and  spirit,2  or  fill  the  aching  void  which  nothing 
can  make  good  ?  To  leave  this  mortal  scene,  to 
shift  this  mortal  coil,  to  “go  we  know  not  whither,” 

To  lie  in  cold  obstruction  and  to  rot ; 


this  has  assuredly  been  through  all  ages  the  ruling 
dread,  the  master-doubt  which  haunts  the  mind  of 
man.3  What,  then,  if  the  sum  of  all  our  knowing  be 
to  find  that  he,  also,  is  but  the  creature  of  a  day,  a 
modification  of  undying  matter,  an  emanation,  the 
sport  of  generative  forces,  a  passing  type,  a  sin- 


1  Materialism  really  inverts  the  true  order  of  existence.  Compare 

Plato,  Legg X.  888,  889.  “  II  parait  bien,”  says  Leibnitz  of  Spinoza, 

“  que  l’ame  ne  lui  etoit  qu’une  modification  passagere :  et  lorsqu’il  fait 
semblant  de  la  faire  durable  et  meme  perpetuelle,  il  y  substitue  l’idee 
du  corps,  qui  est  une  simple  notion  et  non  pas  une  chose  reelle  et 
actuelle.” — Theodicee ,  p.  12,  a  most  pregnant  passage. 

2  “  Pretendent-ils  nous  avoir  bien  rejouis  de  nous  dire  qu’ils  tiennent 
que  notre  ame  n’est  qu’un  peu  de  vent  et  de  fumee,  et  encore  de  nous  le 
dire  d’un  ton  de  voix  fier  et  content  ?  Est-ce  done  une  chose  a  dire 
gaiement  ?  Et  n’est-ce  pas  une  chose  a  dire,  au  contraire,  tristement 
oomme  la  chose  du  monde  la  plus  triste  ?  ” — Pascal,  Pens.,  Art.  I. 

3  It  was  this  which  led  Epicurus  to  say  that  “  if  fear  of  the  Gods  and 
fear  of  death  were  not,  we  might  well  do  without  Physics:”  and  compare 
the  effect  of  the  preaching  of  Paulinus  on  the  Northumbrians  in  Bede, 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


223 


gular  variety,  linked  in  the  evolution  of  eternal 
Nature,  or  “  throned  in  the  arms  of  an  Almighty 
Necessity  ”  ?  One  fact,  or  set  of  facts,  as  yet 
repels  this  monster  generalization,  which  would 
otherwise  reduce  all  specific  sciences  to  an  absolute 
uniformity,  and  confound  them  in  one  undistin- 
guishable  identity.  One  Science  holds  bravely  on 
through  these  surgings  of  opinion,  and  the  buffets 
of  an  absolute  criticism :  the  science  of  God  and 
the  Soul,  existences  essentially  different  from  all 
material  forms,  and  bound  each  to  other  by  rela¬ 
tions  which  give  to  Religion  a  meaning  and  a 
name.1  Man,  it  has  been  finely  said,  “  is  alone  in 
nature,  a  world  within  a  world;”  (and  yet  he  is  not 
alone,  for  his  Father  is  with  him;)  “he  alone  of 

II.  E.,  II.  xiii.  Hence  the  profound  melancholy  of  classic  Paganism  on 
this  topic. 

Soles  occidere  et  redire  possunt. 

Nobis  cum  semel  occidit  brevis  lux 

Nox  est  perpetua  una  dormienda.— Catullus. 

Damna  tamen  celeres  reparant  ca3lestia  lunge. 

Nos  ubi  decidimus 

Quo  pater  iEneas,  quo  dives  Tullus  et  Ancus, 

Pulvis  et  umbra  sumus. — Horace. 

Such  thoughts  are  but  echoes  of  the  old  plaint,  “  One  generation  passeth 
away  and  another  generation  cometh :  but  the  earth  abideth  for  ever.” 
— Eccles.  i.  4.  “Unde  enim  metuunt  mori  et  malunt  in  ilia  serumna 
vivere  quam  earn  morte  finire  nisi  quia  satis  apparet  quam  natura 
refugiat  non  esse  ?  August.,  Civ.  D.,  XI.  xxvii.  It  may  be  hereafter 
found  to  be  true  that  a  spiritual  substance,  by  virtue  of  its  essential 
constitution,  is  immortal  ;  but  at  present  our  knowledge  of  the  fact 
must  be  inferential.  See  Mill,  Examination,  p.  211. 

1  “  lleliget  ergo  nos  religio  uni  Omnipotenti  Deo.” — August.,  Ver. 
Eel.,  c.  lv.  sub  finem.  “  Si  enim  divina  aut  a  Deo  data  est  anima,  sine 
dubio  datorem  suum  novit .” — Tert.,  Test.  Anim.,  ii. 


This  doc¬ 
trine  asso¬ 
ciated  with 
religion, 


224 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  V. 


all  the  creatures  communes  with  a  Being  out  of 
Nature;  and  he  divides  himself  from  all  other 
physical  life  by  prophesying,  in  the  face  of  univer¬ 
sal  visible  decay,  his  own  immortality.  dhe 
spirit  of  man,  then,  protests  that  it,  too,  is  a  feet,  a 
and  satis-  distinct  consciousness;  it  lives,  and,  living,  exists 
Chrisdan e  for  that  eternity  of  which  it  alone  is  cognisant, 
system.  tpe  spiritual  element  in  man  be  admitted,  it 

is,  at  least,  not  unreasonable  that  there  should 
exist  a  Revelation  as  the  supply  to  its  inevitable 
questionings.  Even  on  a  theory  of  Evolution, 
Christianity  would  have  most  claims  to  be  heard.2 
For  it  satisfies  to  the  full  the  native  testimony  of 
the  soul  of  man,  rising,  as  it  were,  by  a  law  of  con¬ 
tinuity  from  animalism  to  rationality,  from  the  rule 
of  the  senses  to  speculative  intelligence,  and  from 
self-seeking  passion  to  self-sacrificing  love. 

The  only  §  6.  Thus  a  true  vital  antagonism  between 
tagonism  Religion  and  Science,  fatal  to  the  permanence  and 
!-d,gion  progress  of  the  former,  alone  emerges  where,  and 
and  science  ^  long  as,  the  iatter  reCognizing  only  the  validity 

1  Mozley,  Bampt.  L.,  p.  89.  “  Immortality  is  not  a  doctrine  of  the 
schools,  but  a  faith  of  humanity;  not  based  on  the  metaphysic  or 
proved  by  the  logic  of  a  given  system ;  but  the  utterance  of  an  instinct 
common  to  the  race  which  has  made  itself  heard  wherever  man  has 
advanced  from  a  religion  of  nature  to  a  religion  of  faith.  And  there  is 
no  article  of  belief  he  so  reluctantly  surrenders  even  to  the  demands  of 
system.”— Fairbairn  on  Belief  in  Immortality.  This  proposition  is 
sustained  by  the  learned  author  through  a  large  and  careful  induction 
of  the  most  ancient  religions  of  the  earth. 

2  “  Aux  yeux  de  l’histoire,”  says  a  Positivist  writer,  “  il  n’y  a  point 
de  fausse  religion  :  il  n’y  a  que  des  religions  incomplfctes,  qui  chcminent 
dans  les  temps  et  se  perfectionnent.” — Littre,  Paroles,  p.  19. 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OP  CHRISTIANITY. 


225 


oi  phenomena,  excludes  from  these  all  operation  of 
man  s  spiritual  part.  In  strictness,  Science  must 
he  held  to  comprehend  the  connection  of  all  truths  relative  to 
certain  from  the  laws  and  constitution  of  theenceofa 
human  mind.  If,  however,  it  is  assumed  that  m  principle 
Nature 1  nothing  exists  but  what  is  given  in  experi-  m  man' 
ence,  represented  in  the  forms  of  time  and  space 
and  force,  under  the  relation  of  cause  and  effect ; 
then,  indeed,  a  principle  which  originates  its  own 
acts,  which  prophesies  its  own  responsibility,  and 
which  explains,  out  of  its  own  instinctive  habit,  its 
existence  and  destiny,  its  relations  to  God  and  to 
the  universe  in  which  it  finds  itself,  can  onlv  he 
something  beside  and  beyond  Nature,  even  while 
1  elated  to  it.  It  must,  then,  stand  or  fall  at  the 
caprice  of  Nature’s  worshippers.2  But,  happily 
(apart  from  any  verbal  controversy),  the  existence 

1  Compare  Coleridge,  A.  B.,  pp.  48,  190.  “  The  ways  and  pro¬ 
ceedings  of  God  with  spirits  are  not  included  in  Nature,  that  is,  in 
the  laws  of  heaven  and  earth.”— Bacon,  Confession  of  Faith  ( Works , 

VII.  221).  In  the  magnificent  passage  in  Professor  Huxley’s  Lay 
Sermons  (p.  37),  beginning,  “  That  man,  I  think,  has  had  a  liberal 
education,”  &c.,  there  is  a  total  omission  of  any  spiritual  element  in 
man  capable  of  culture  or  expansion.  On  the  importance  of  the  spiri¬ 
tual  element  in  philosophy  at  the  present  time,  see  Janet,  La  Crise 
Philosophique ,  p.  7. 

2  Leibnitz  tells  a  story  of  a  learned  chemist,  who  “avoit  fait  une 
priere,  qui  pensa  lui  faire  des  affaires.  Elle  commenfoit :  0  sancta 
mater  Natura,  aderne  rerum  ordo.  Et  elle  aboutissoit  h  dire  que  cette 
Nature  lui  devoit  pardonner  ses  defauts,  puisqu’elle  en  etoit  cause 

elle-memc.  Thtod .,  p.  605.  He  seems  to  have  been  of  the  same  mind 
with  Lear : 

fihou,  Nature,  art  my  Goddess  :  to  thy  law 

My  services  are  bound. 

Q 


226  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  V. 

of  such  a  principle  in  man  is  capable,  as  with  other 
psychological  facts,1  of  experimental  and  scientific 
This  capa-  proof.  It  is  not  simply  that,  as  has  been  said,  it 
scientific  all  argument  is  against  it,  all  belief  is  for  it.  I  he 
pr°°f  grounds  of  that  belief  are  patent.  It  is  based,  not 
alone  on  the  precarious  testimony  of  individual 
consciousness,  but  on  a  comparison  of  such  con¬ 
sciousness,  under  many  aspects ;  on  a  wide  gene¬ 
ralization  of  varying  ages  and  countries,  and 
a  collection,  practically  unlimited,  of  particular 
instances.  The  '  notion  of  sj)ivitucil  action  is 
admitted  by  Mr.  Darwin  to  be  instinctive  in  man. 
from  testi-  “  The  conception  of  the  human  soul,”  writes  the 
denfand  historian  of  Primitive  Culture,2  66  is,  as  to  its  most 
modem,  eggentja]  nature,  continuous  from  the  philosophy  of 

the  savage  thinker  to  that  of  the  modern  professor 
of  theology.  Its  definition  has  remained  from  the 
first  that  of  an  animating,  separable,  surviving 
entity,  the  vehicle  of  individual  personal  exist- 

1  The  fallacy  met  with  in  the  writings  of  Mr.  Buckle,  as  well  as  of 
the  more  purely  Positivist  school,  is  to  assume  that  psychology  is  a 
branch  of  metaphysic ;  that  metaphysic  does  not  study  phenomena ; 
and  that  its  object-matter  is  the  individual  mind.  The  impossibility 
is  evident  of  accounting  for  the  ideas  of  God  and  of  man’s  personality  on 
purely  materialistic  principles.  On  the  Positivist  notions  ol  the  soul, 

comp.  Janet,  La  Crise  Phil.,  p.  115. 

2  Tylor,  I.  453.  “  The  minimum  definition  of  religion  is  the  belief 

in  spiritual  beings.”— I.  383.  In  the  shadow,  pulse,  heart,  breath,  he 
finds  in  the  rudest  tribes  a  generally  apprehended  representation  or 
suggestion  of  the  soul.  On  the  mythology  of  the  Soul  (a  distinct 
lin?  of  proof),  see  Max  Muller  on  the  Philosophy  of  Mythology 
( Cont .  Pev.,  XIX.  108).  On  the  Hebrew  and  Indo-Germanic  appella¬ 
tions  of  man  a,nd  spirit,  compare  Delitzscli,  Biblical  Psychology,  pp.  82, 
143,  E.  T. 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


227 


ence.”  The  highest  efforts  of  heathen  philosophy 
111  Last  and  est  culminated  in  a  recognition  of 
its  authoiity  and  power,  its  sole  or  corporate 
immortality.1  Moreover,  the  reality  of  the  personal fr01?1  ex‘ 

re  .•  J  1  amination 

anections  m  man,  which  are  the  groundwork  of°^^uman 
most  of  his  acts,  and  of  all  which  constitutes  his 
true  nobility,  has  never  been  denied.  Yet,  under 
a  pure  Naturalism,  excluding  all  recognition  of  a 
spiritual  life,  whatever  may  be  demonstrated  as  to 
their  origin,  these  must  appear  both  meaningless 
and  void.  Their  earnestness  and  simple  trust, 

their  rich  store  of  high  and  unselfish  feeling,' 
become  fantastic  and  absurd.2  The  same,  also,  is 

1  It;  has  been  maintained,  I  am  aware,  that  a  belief  in  God  is  com¬ 
patible  with  an  ignorance  of  the  soul’s  immortality ;  and  that  this  was 
the  state  of  heathen  opinion  at  the  time  of  the  coming  of  Christ  (see 
ean  Merivale,  Lectt.,  p.  24.  At  p.  54  he  writes,  “  Belief  in  a  future 
state  is  the  touchstone  of  all  spiritual  conceptions  of  human  nature.”) 

1  do  not  think  this  has  yet  been  proved.  Plutarch’s  treatise,  Non 
jmse  suave  v.  sec.  Epic.,  should  be  consulted  on  the  differences  of  opi¬ 
nion  among  the  Stoics.  See  Dollinger,  Gentile  and  Jew ,  I.  353.  It  is 
quite  possible,  however,  for  ingenious  disputants  in  all  ages  to  ar^ue 
against  the  instincts  of  common  sense.  Cicero  ( Tusc .  Disp.  I.  xvi. 
xvin.j  XXXI.)  writes:  “  Sed  ut  Deos  esse  natura  opinamur,  qualesque 
suit,  ratione  cognoscimus :  sic  permanere  animos  arbitramur  consensu 
liationum  omnium  ;  qua  in  sede  maneant,  qualesque  sint  ratione  dis- 
cen  um  est.  Herodotus  (II.  123)  makes  it  an  Egyptian  discovery: 
e  sewhere  he  admits  it  to  have  been  a  Teutonic  conception  (IV.  94). 

is  no  objection  that  this  conviction  is  a  gradual  one  (see  Fairbairu, 
u.  s  o.  A.,  XX.  374,  ff.),  any  more  than  that  the  belief  in  a  God  has 
ound  recusants.  See  Harless,  Christian  Ethics ,  p.  42,  E.  T. 

•  a ■  “  ai=’Umen*'  ag^inst  all  systems  tending  to  Atheism  is 

"  rrf  Shaftesbm7  in  his  Enquiry  concerning  Virtue  (  Works , 
t  1 0  <<  a!  Same  t0pic  is  P°werfnlly  handled  by  Mr.  Hutton,  Essays , 

ull>  realized  Atheism  will  undermine  the  worth  of  per¬ 
sonal  human  affections ;  not  merely  indirectly  by  losing  sight  of  immor- 

Q  2 


from  in¬ 
ductive 
analysis. 


Its  results. 


228  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  V. 

true  of  the  religious  sentiment  in  man,  of  which,  it 
cannot  be  doubted,  his  nature  is  capable  when 
developed  by  culture  and  improvement.  Thus 
religious  biography,  exhibiting  in  various  ages  of 
Christianity  and  at  different  eras  of  civilization 
the  same  characteristic  features  and  common  results, 
pointing  accordingly  to  a  common  origin,  furnishes 
an  argument  of  a  strictly  inductive  kind  for  the 
determination  of  a  spiritual  element  in  human 
nature  correspondent  to  influences  of  the  Divine 
Spirit.  Hence  that  communion  of  man  with  his 
Maker,  44  the  Father  of  Spirits,”  whereof  he  alone 
is  capable,  an  excellency  whereby  he  is  distin¬ 
guished  from  the  beasts  that  perish,1  and  is  crowned 
with  glory  and  worship. 

Ideo  venerabile  soli 

Sortiti  ingenium  divinorum  que  capaces. 

From  that  fountain  flow  his  highest  and  purest 
inspirations ;  but  no  less  those  contradictions  and 
warrings  of  counter-impulses,  the  travail  and  the 
toil  of  yearning  souls,  conscious  of  Heaven,  yet 

tality,  but  still  more  by  cutting  off  the  chief  spring  of  their  spiritual  life. 
If  that  fine  wide-spreading  network,  hidden  from  all  human  eyes,  the 
winding  crossing  blending  diverging  threads  of  human  affection,  which 
hold  together  human  society,  be  indeed  conceived  as  issuing  every¬ 
where  out  of  everlasting  night;  as  spun,  snapped  asunder,  and  again 
repaired  by  the  mere  automatic  operation  of  Nature’s  unconscious  and 
impersonal  energy ;  the  personal  affections  lose  quite  the  richest  and 
most  permanent  of  the  conscious  influences  at  least,  which  minister  to 
their  life  and  growth.” 

1  Compare  Lactant.  ( Div .  Inst.,  III.  x.).  Thus  man,  created  in  the 
likeness  of  God,  must  be  essentially  a  spirit  (John  iv.  24).  Gregory 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


229 


borne  down  to  earth,  unresting,1  unsatisfied  while 
still  the  slaves  of  sense.  But  with  the  reality  of  i.ts  connee- 
the  spiritual  principle  in  man  is  inseparably  con-  the  exist- 
nected  the  presence  of  a  will  which,  by  its  acts, 
announces  its  own  personality  and  individual  being. 

As  it  is  impossible  to  sever  in  conception  the 
notions  of  spirit  and  will,  so  practically  it  is  by 
the  character  of  the  will  developed  in  act  that  the 
spirit  itself  is  differentiated.  Thus  is  it  that  we 
know  “  what  manner  of  spirit  we  are  of.”  It  is 
for  this  reason  probably  that  in  Holy  Scripture2 
the  term  itself,  as  a  power  or  property  seated  in  the 
human  soul,  never  stands  singly,  but  is  always 
specified.  It  is  the  “  spirit  of  meekness,”  the  “  spirit 
of  knowledge,”  the  “  spirit  of  fear,”  the  “  spirit  of 
love,”  and  the  like.  The  recognition  of  this  prin¬ 
ciple  from  first  to  last,  in  the  Old  as  in  the  New 
Testament,  gives  unity  and  consistency  to  Bevela- 


of  Nyssa  (ap.  Delitzsch,  p.  197)  makes  use  of  the  image  of  a  piece  of 
glass,  which,  although  in  very  diminished  proportion,  reflects  the  entire 
form  of  the  sun,  to  represent  how  out  of  the  limited  nature  of  man’s 
spirit  shine  forth  the  copies  of  the  inexpressible  attributes  of  the 
Godhead.  Thus  Goethe : 

War’  nicht  das  Auge  sonnenhaft 

Wie  konnten  wir  das  Licht'  erblicken? 

Lebt’  nicht  in  uns  des  Gottes  eigne  Kraft 
Wie  konnte  uns  das  Gottliches  entziicken? 

See  Sir  W.  Hamilton,  Disc.,  p.  19. 

1  “  Quia  fecisti  nos  ad  Te,  Domine,  inquietum  est  cor  nostrum,  donee 
requiescat  in  Te.” — August.,  Conf.,  sub  init. 

2  This  remark  is  made  by  Coleridge,  A.  B.,  p.  42.  Compare  the 
teaching  of  the  Homily  for  Whitsunday,  Ft.  I.,  sub  fin. 


230 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  V. 


tion.1  The  proof,  then,  of  our  spiritual  nature, 
together  with  the  admission  of  this  element  in  man, 
may  he  regarded  as  the  one  thing  vital  to  all 
and  reia-  spiritual  religion.  It  alone  suffices  to  account  for 
perma-  the  existence,  the  office,  and  the  success  of  Chris- 
chris-  tianity.  On  its  reality  as  a  principle,  and  on  the 
unquestionable  character  of  its  testimony  rest  the 
bases  of  our  religion,  as  an  enduring  and  undying 
faith.  Yet  now  we  are  called  on  to  believe  that  it 
is  the  function  of  Knowledge  (which  is,  however, 
the  true  image2  and  mirror  of  Being)  to  extinguish 
the  notion  of  such  a  spiritual  principle  in  man,  and 
to  abolish  all  faith  in  the  reality  and  power  of  its 
utterances.  This,  it  seems,  is  to  be  the  latest  work 
of  positive  Science,  its  closing  service  to  mankind, 
the  crowning  effort  of  the  progress  and  culture  of 
natural  studies. 

Science  §  7.  But  it  is  said  that  in  the  advance  of 
be  destine-  knowledge  we  are  fast  losing  the  elementary  prin- 
reiigion  ciples,  both  of  divine  worship  and  of  religious 
belief.  In  surprise,  if  not  in  fear,  according  to  the 
old  observation  of  Aristotle3  (or,  more  strictly,  of 


1  “  I  stand  before  myself  as  before  a  riddle :  whose  key  is  not  to  be 
found  in  the  human  self-consciousness,  but  is  given  to  it  by  God  in  the 
word  of  revelation.” — Harless,  Christian  Ethics,  p.  50. 

2  “  Scientia  essentke  imago.” — Bacon,  N.  0.,  Aph.  cxx. 

3  Aia  yap  to  Oavpa^tiv  oi  avdpconoL  /cal  vvv  kcu  to  npcoTov  rjpi~avTo 
(JuXoaocpAv’  ...08  anopiov  /cal  Savpd^co v  o’terai  dyvohv’  dio  Ka\ 
(fn\op,v6os  6  <j)i,\6o-o(f)6s  7rd>s  ianv. — Arist.,  Metaph .,  I.  ii.  MaXa  cfnXo- 
a6<pov  tovto  to  7 rdOos  to  8avp.d£eiv’  ov  yap  ilXXrj  ap^rj  (})iXo(ro(pias  rj 
avTTj. — Plato,  Thecet.,  155.  D.  Compare  Mr.  Morell,  Phil,  of  Iteligion, 
p.  202,  and  Coleridge,  A.  It,  p.  178.  Sir  W.  Hamilton,  Lect.,  I.  37, 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


231 


Plato),  all  Philosophy  and  all  Religion  found  their 
beginning;  in  the  felt  need,  that  is,  of  a  Being 
to  still  the  alarms  and  satisfy  the  curiosity  of  the 
human  mind.  “  Physical  wonder,”  says  a  recent 
writer,1  “  is  no  doubt  an  introduction  to  the  belief  in  as  extin- 

guishing 

the  supernatural.  It  tends  to  raise  in  the  mind  a  the  senti- 
larger  idea  of  possibility ;  the  notion  of  the  potential  awe  and 

•  •  admira- 

as  distinguished  from  what  is  actual,  the  sense  of  tion. 
the  unknown.”  But,  at  the  present  time,  the 
grounds,  it  is  argued,  of  physical  wonder  are  dis¬ 
appearing.  Under  a  rigid,  unfailing  uniformity, 
each  event  can  be  assigned  to  its  appropriate 
antecedent. 


The  world’s  young  ignorance  is  o’er, 
As  Science  forging  day  by  day 
Her  close-linked  chain  withdraws 
The  once-felt  touches  of  God’s  hand 
For  dumb  organic  laws. 


There  is  further  to  be  considered  the  ordinary  effect 
of  custom  and  familiarity  upon  the  mind.  Repe¬ 
tition,  it  has  been  often  observed,  diminishes 
wonder,  and  in  matters  of  a  moral  and  religious 
kind  sensibly  reduces  the  feeling  of  awe.  It  is  This 

J  doubtful. 

true,  it  must  be  admitted,  that  the  fact  of  not  feel¬ 
ing  surprise  at  a  phenomenon  which  really  remains 


comments  on  the  tendency  of  physical  studies  to  extinguish  religious 
adoration  by  mechanical  views  of  Kature.  He  has,  indeed,  been 
powerfully  combated  by  Mr.  Mill  (Exam.,  p.  544),  who  seeks  to 
strengthen  himself  by  the  united  testimony  of  two  eminently  religious 
minds,  Wordsworth  and  Faraday.  Compare  Mr.  Darwin  (Descent  of 
Man,  I.  68). 

1  Dr.  Mozley,  Bampt.  Lect.,  p.  76. 


232 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  v. 


unexplained,  is  no  adequate  reason  for  not  seeking 
to  assign  the  ultimate  causes  of  its  existence,  even 
though  we  are  thus  led  to  the  confines  of  super¬ 
natural  agency.  It  is,  however,  unfortunately  a 
characteristic  of  the  present  era  of  thought,  that  an 
ascertainment  of  facts  or  of  a  law  combining*  or 
regulating  facts  is  held  sufficient  without  proceed¬ 
ing  to  any  further  explanation  of  them.  Thus  an 
indifference  on  the  part  of  mankind  at  large,  or  of 
our  own  generation,  towards  a  religious  view  of 
Nature  is  assumed ;  it  is  seldom  confirmed,  and  is 
certainly  not  justified.  But  it  is  urged  that  now 
uonoftU"  a^m^ra^ori  vastness  and  simplicity  of  Natural 

Nature  for  may  well  take  the  place  of  childlike  surprise 

a  personal  and  immature  suppositions,  and  that  it  is  the  only 
sentiment  worthy  of  the  philosophical  elevation  of 
our  time.  No  doubt,  there  is  a  wonder  which  is 
the  legitimate  offspring  of  scientific  knowledge.1 
But  there  is  no  admiration  in  it ;  enthusiasm  does 
not  spring  from  any  intellectual  deductions.  Ad¬ 


miration  cannot  really  be  felt  in  respect  of  things, 
or  any  arrangement  of  things.  It  has  regard  only 
of  persons  \  it  is  the  tribute  of  mind  to  mind.2 

]  0i^v  Gavpdaeuv  ovrcos  dvr)p  yccoperpiicSs,  cos  «  yivoiro  fj 
didperpos  ficrprjrrj.— Arist.,  Metaph.,  I.  ii.  “  Admiration,”  says  Mr. 
Mill,  “  is  a  different  thing  from  wonder,  and  is  often  at  its  greatest 

height  when  the  strangeness  which  is  a  necessary  condition  of  wonder 
has  died  away.” 

„Man,  says  Carlyle,  “  cannot  know,  unless  he  can  worship  in  some 
way.”  “  A  man,”  writes  Mr.  Picton,  “  cannot  worship  a  thing ,  however 
big.”— Wen;  Theories  arid  Old  Faith ,  p.  45.  The  same  writer  elo- 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


233 


And  thus  if  God  be  excluded  from  the  universe  its  conse- 
which  He  has  framed,  to  make  room  for  Law ;  and  quulLLb' 
if  man,  through  the  negation  of  will  and  spirit,  be 
degraded  to  the  scale  of  a  mere  chattel,  and  bonds¬ 
man  to  the  order  of  Nature  ;  admiration  of  the 
wisdom  and  beauty  of  creation,  together  with  fear 
(now  denounced  as  Fetishism)  of  the  power  and 
justice  of  the  Creator,  are,  it  may  be  admitted,  out 
of  place.1  Now,  in  proportion  to  our  increasing 
knowledge  of  the  Laws  of  Nature,  our  old  supersti¬ 
tions,  it  is  said,  in  regard  to  the  Author  and  so- 
called  Administrator  of  the  Universe  must  totally 
change.  For  if  all  Leligion  reposes  ultimately  on  Subversive 
fear,2  and  is  most  marked  in  those  climes  and  Reilg?on[ 

quently  remarks  (p.  52),  “  When  once  man  could  so  far  stand  distinct 
from  and  over  against  nature  as  to  feel  wonder,  the  life  of  contemplation 
was  begun,  and  at  least  the  germ  of  God-consciousness  was  formed. 

For  the  sense  of  wonder  involves  the  realization  of  a  disturbed  unity 
which  the  soul  struggles  to  restore.  And  here  we  have  the  beginnings 
both  of  Science  and  Religion,  which  like  highly  differentiated  organs  in 
the  mature  animal  may  very  well  have  been  indistinguishable  in  their 
germs.  The  sense  of  wonder  is  closely  akin  to  that  of  awe,  and  easily 
suggests  some  unknown  power.” 

1  Mr.  Hutton,  Essays,  I.  16,  has  some  profound  remarks  on  this  great 
moral  want  in  Atheism.  “  If  you  do  not  believe  that  ‘  Good  ’  is  living 
and  free  that  it  is  a  person — you  cannot  believe  that  it  will  find  you 
out ;  and  you  may  be  truly  as  incompetent  to  find  it  out  as  to  leave  the 
earth  for  the  sun.” 

Mr.  Buckle,  Ilist.  Civ.,  II.  171.  “The  origin  of  veneration  is 
wonder  and  fear.  These  two  passions,  either  alone  or  combined,  are  the 
ordinary  source  of  veneration ;  and  the  way  in  which  they  arise  is 
obvious.  AVe  wonder  because  we  are  ignorant ;  and  we  fear  because  we 
are  weak.’  lb.,  III.  272.  “  The  whole  system  of  the  theologians  reposes 
upon  fear,  and  upon  fear  of  the  worst  kind,”  &c.  He  thus  repeats  the 
notions  of  Hume  ( Natural  Hist,  of  Religion,  §  vi.  &c.).  Shaftesbury 
(Works,  III.  36)  more  truly  observes,  “We  can  admire  nothing  pro- 


234 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  V. 


countries  where  the  grandeur  of  natural  pheno¬ 
mena  and  the  suddenness  of  physical  calamities 
overpower  the  resources  of  man ;  let  this  fear  be 
taken  away,  and  the  pillars  of  all  dogmatic  beliefs, 
the  slow  and  laboured  inventions  of  a  cowed  and 
panic-stricken  spirit,  will  crumble  into  dust.  Such 

but  neither  js  the  line  of  proof  from  which  it  is  inferred  that 

necessary  •*- 

as  the  human  race  advances  in  culture  ;  as  we 
mount  the  scale  of  causes  which  link  creation  by  a 
golden  chain  with  the  throne  of  God 1  and  “  climb 
up  into  Heaven  no  godly  fear,  no  inbred  sense  of 

babiPr°"  awe>  sP^r^  captive  when,  covered  with 

the  shadow  of  His  glory,  we  draw  near  the  ante- 

foundly  without  a  certain  religious  veneration,  and  because  this  borders 
so  much  on  fear,  and  raises  a  certain  tremor  or  horror  of  like  appear¬ 
ance,  ’tis  easy  to  give  that  turn  to  the  affection,  and  represent  all 
enthusiasm  and  religious  extasy  as  the  product  or  mere  effect  of  fear. 
Primus  in  orbe  Deos  fecit  Timor.  But  the  original  passion,  as  appears 
plainly,  is  of  another  kind,”  &c.  Compare  Bacon,  Augm.  Sc.,  II.  xiii., 
de  panicis  terroribus,  and  Lucretius  I.  102-27.  Mr.  Lecky  (77.  E.  M., 
I.  149)  remarks,  “In  a  few  minds  the  contemplation  of  the  sublime 
order  of  Nature  produces  a  reverential  feeling  ;  but  to  the  great  majority 
of  mankind  it  is  an  incontestable  though  mournful  fact,  that  the  dis¬ 
covery  of  controlling  and  unchanging  Law  deprives  phenomena  of  their 
moral  significance,  and  nearly  all  the  social  and  political  spheres  in 
which  reverence  was  fostered  have  passed  away.”  The  same  writer 
(Hist.  Rat.,  I.  285)  has  some  exquisite  observations  on  the  manner  in 
which  “  the  sense  of  beauty  (and  growth  of  art)  has  gradually  encroached 
upon  and  absorbed  the  feeling  of  reverence.”  .  .  .  “  Religious  ideas,”  he 
adds,  “  die  like  the  sun ;  their  last  rays,  possessing  little  heat,  are  ex¬ 
pended  in  creating  beauty.” 

1  “  Catena  ilia  Homeri  decantata  (causarum  scilicet  naturalium  ad 
pedem  solii  J ovis  fixa  memorabatur :  neque  quisquam  Metaphysicam  et 
qu?B  in  natura  aderna  et  immobilia  sunt  tractavit  atque  animum  a  fluxu 
rerum  paulisper  abduxit  qui  non  simul  in  Theologian  Naturalem 
incident;  adeo  paratus  et  propinquus  est  trausitus  a  vertice  ilia  pyra¬ 
mids  ad  Divina.” — Bacon,  Works,  I.  525. 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


235 


chambers  of  Deity,  and  ]ift  “  the  transparent  veil 
which  dimly  hides  the  shrine  of  an  Eternal  Being.” 

Well  may  we  agree  with  a  writer  who,  on  his 
part,  also  has  left  his  mark  on  the  thought  of  the 
time,1  when  he  holds  that  44  the  character  of  our 
troublous  era  lies  even  in  this;  that  man  has  for 
ever  cast  away  fear ,  which  is  the  lower,  but  has 
not  yet  risen  into  perennial  reverence ,  which  is 
his  higher  and  highest  attribute.”  To  degrade 
Almighty  God  to  the  level  of  His  works  by  making 
them  the  substitute  for  an  unknown,  unappreciable 
principle ;  to  confound  Nature  and  the  laws  and 
powers  of  Matter  with  their  Author  and  Preserver, 
this  is  rather  to  be  accounted  fetishism,  however 
latent,  or  in  whatever  manner  modified  by  the  Unsuitable 
temper  of  the  time.  For  does  not  any  such  theory  tellectual 
change  the  truth  of  God  into  a  lie,  worshipping  of  the  age. 
and  serving  the  creature  more  than  the  Creator, 

Who  “  is  blessed  for  ever  ”  ? 2  Where,  however,  we 
may  reasonably  inquire,  is  the  degradation  to  the 
nobility  of  man,  when  he  lays  his  hand  upon  his 
mouth  in  the  presence  of  his  Maker  and  Preserver, 

Who  4 4  maketh  the  winds  His  angels,  and  the 
flaming  fire  His  minister and  though  he  confess 


1  Carlyle,  Sartor  Resartus ,  p.  173,  and  Miscell.  I.  19.  We  are,  in 
fact,  in  that  state  of  things  described  by  Shakspeare,  where  he  says, 
“  We  have  our  philosophical  persons,  to  make  modern  and  familiar 
things  supernatural  and  causeless.  Hence  is  it  that  we  make  trifles  of 
terrors,  ensconcing  ourselves  into  seeming  knowledge  when  we  should 
submit  ourselves  to  an  unknown  fear.” — All's  Well ,  act  ii.  sc.  3. 

3  Rom.  i.  25. 


236 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  V. 


Himself  but  dust  and  ashes  ?  Reverence,  we  may 
rest  assured,  will  never  be  analyzed  into  supersti¬ 
tion  ;  nor  devotion,  the  instinctive  tribute  of  man’s 
spirit,  into  ignorant  alarm.1 

Religion  §  8.  In  determining,  then,  the  relative  position  of 
dent  of  Theology  and  Science,  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that 
know-Ce  in  the  causes  for  which  Religion  exists,  are  not  such 
ledge'  as  to  depend  on  any  advance  in  mere  knowledge. 
The  difficulties  for  which  it  accounts  are  such  as 
no  perfection  of  Science  can  hope  to  remove.  All 
existing  religions  have  been  denominated  as  “  so 
many  modes  of  manifestation  of  the  unknowable.” 
If  so,  they  must,  at  least,  teach  something  about 
Grod  and  His  dealings  with  mankind.  But,  in 
what  way  shall  Science  look  to  satisfy  the  strivings 
of  man’s  spirit,  or  suppress  his  sense  of  sin  ? 
When  it  shall  have  substituted  for  conscience  and 


Attempts 
on  the  part 
of  philo¬ 
sophy  to 
usurp  its 
functions, 


remorse  Necessity  and  Law,  will  it,  indeed,  have 
found  the  “balm  in  Grilead  ”  which  may  “  minister 
to  the  mind  diseased  ”  ?  But,  if  the  need  of  a 
Religion  to  tranquillize  the  throes  of  human  nature 
be  admitted,  an  argument  for  its  permanence  will 
appear  in  the  very  inability  of  all  foregone  philo¬ 
sophy  to  frame  one.  It  is  not  that  the  experiment 
has  not  been  tried,  but  that  it  has  always  failed. 
If  Stoicism,2  for  example,  with  its  grand  and  lofty 


1  This  innate  feeling  of  reverence  connected  with  dependence  seems 
admitted  even  "by  Dr.  Strauss  in  his  Alter  und  Neuer  Olaube ,  p.  146. 

2  Mr.  Lecky,  in  his  History  of  European  Morals,  I.  186-235,  has 
touched  the  subject  of  Stoicism  with  a  masterly,  if  with  a  partial,  hand. 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


2  37 


ideal  of  following  God  and  becoming  godlike,  its 
unselfish  enthusiasm — 

Non  sibi  sed  toti  genitum  se  credere  mundo, 

its  perfect  severance  of  virtue  from  expediency,  its  y  of 

^  #  1  #  J  Stoicism. 

subjugation  of  the  affections  to  reason,  its  recogni¬ 
tion  of  an  overruling  Providence,  and  of  a  system 
of  probation,  its  high  sense  of  the  native  capacities 
of  man  and  the  power  of  his  will,  of  the  duty  of 
self-scrutiny  and  of  mental  purity ;  if  a  system  of 
morals  and  thought,  thus  grandly  framed,  failed  in 
practice  through  its  want  of  acquaintance  with 
that  nature  which  it  strove  to  elevate,  from  its 
suppression  of  its  emotions,  from  its  repression  of 
its  desires,  from  its  own  austerity  and  hardness, 
from  its  virtual  disbelief  in  a  future  life  ;  what 
creed  of  mortal  mould  may  look  to  take  its  place  ? 
Neo-Platonism,  Eclecticism,  tried  and  failed.1  Are  2,f  Neo‘ 

riatomsm. 

we  now  to  look  to  the  halting  atheism  of  a  nega¬ 
tive  belief,  the  “Catholicism  without  Christianity” 
of  a  Positivist  Church?  Inherent  diversities  of .0f Positiv* 

ism. 

opinion  ;  want  of  practical  acquaintance  with  the 
needs  of  man’s  soul  and  with  its  boundless  capaci¬ 
ties  of  emotion  and  idealization ;  the  impossibility 
of  building  faith  upon  a  speculative  foundation  ; 

It  had,  doubtless,  its  darker  side,  over  which  he  casts  a  veil,  in  its 
paederasty,  tendency  to  suicide,  &c.  Comp.  Dollinger,  G.  a.  Jew ,  I.  357, 
and  for  its  later  development,  IT.  124-7.  “  Never,”  he  admits,  “  was 
there  a  system  of  morality  which  found  so  many  and  such  striking 
echoes  in  Christianity  as  does  that  of  Epictetus.” 

1  Compare  Dean  Merivale,  Lectt.,  p.  119  ;  and  Pressense,  P.  II.  tom.  ii. 
p.  60.  Eclecticism  in  morals  is  represented  by  Plutarch. 


Their 

failure. 


Unfair 
attacks 
on  the 
spiritual 
doctrines 
of  Chris¬ 
tianity. 


238  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  V. 

defect  of  imagination  and  constructive  power  to 
frame  any  acceptable  scheme  of  worship ;  these 
and  other  hindrances  have  continually  foiled  philo¬ 
sophers  when  charged  with  the  task  of  putting 
together  a  new  coherent  and  purely  rational  re¬ 
ligion.1  The  prospect  thus  opened  should  not  be 
disregarded  by  those  thinkers  who,  while  profess¬ 
ing  themselves  favourable  to  Christianity  as  a 
type  of  religion,  as  a  moral  ideal,  or  even  as  an 
abstract  rule  of  faith  ;  nevertheless,  in  handling  it, 
leave  no  standing-ground  between  the  admission 
of  critical  canons  fatal  to  all  genuine  belief,  or  a 
return  to  medieval  dogmatism.  It  is  thus  held 
not  unfair  to  attack  Christianity  at  large,  or  some 
particular  article  which  the  Church  has  una  voce 
declared  to  be  a  Christian  doctrine,  by  arguments 
which,  if  valid,  are  valid  against  all  teaching  of 
Revealed  Truth.  Some  postulates  there  must  be 
in  all  systems  of  religious  belief,  as  the  basis  of 
any  argument  in  support  of  the  faith  declared. 
“  Let  him,”  it  has  been  said,  not  unreasonably, 
“  who  is  too  high-minded  to  beg  his  ground,  and 
will  take  it  by  a  strong  hand ;  let  him  fight  it  out 
with  the  Atheist  or  the  Manichean,  but  not  stoop 

1  See  Saisset,  E 'ssais,  pp.  24,  25,  and  some  good  remarks  by  the 
author  of  Ecce  Homo ,  p.  99  :  “  If  philosophy  undertakes  to  solve  the 
same  problem,  what  is  its  method  ?  By  what  means  does  it  hope  to 
awaken  good  impulses  in  hearts  that  were  before  enslaved  to  bad  ones  ? 
....  The  truth  is  that  philosophy  has  no  instruments  that  it  can 
use  for  this  purpose.”  Schleiermacher  also  ( Christlicher  Glaube )  insists 
on  this  same  fact. 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


239 


to  pick  up  their  arrows,  and  then  run  away  to  dis¬ 
charge  them  at  Christianity  or  the  Church.”  1 

§  9.  An  age  of  admitted  scepticism  has  not,  as  Scepticism 
yet,  proved  itself  either  fatal  or,  perhaps,  even  of  inquiry 
dangerous  to  the  truth  of  Christianity.  By  Gibbon  midabie  to 
it  was  thought  to  have  been  really  favourable  to  iellglou’ 
the  progress  of  religion,  that  is,  of  the  Christian 
religion.  It  is  the  modern  fashion  to  predict  that 
it  will  be  its  bane.  But  it  may  be  held  for  certain, 
looking  to  past  experience,  that  a  sceptical  spirit 
must  sooner  or  later  give  way  to  a  state  of  things 
in  which  the  yearning  after  religious  belief  will 
vastly  predominate.  For  scepticism,  though  just 2 
within  just  limits,  being  the  natural  resort  of  the 
intellect  when  overweighted  by  authority,  and 
by  no  means,  therefore,  a  necessary  alien  from  the 
household  of  faith  ;  yet  represents,  at  most,  but  being 
the  negation  of  implicit  belief  or  of  credulity ; transient 
and  is,  therefore,  in  itself,  no  more  than  a  definite 
stage,  a  passing  phase  in  the  process  of  intellectual 

1  Coleridge,  A.  i?.,  p.  221. 

2  Thus  scepticism,  considered  as  a  means  of  arriving  at  truth,  may 
be  coeval  with  belief  itself.  For  “  les  conditions  de  la  civilisation,” 
says  M.  Renan,  “  sont  comme  celles  d’un  probleme  a  donnees  limitees.” 

“  Had  religion,”  he  justly  adds,  “  been  a  simple  superstition,  like  astro¬ 
logy,  science  would  long  since  have  swept  it  away.” — Questions  Con- 
temporaines.  On  the  limits  of  scepticism  Leibnitz  observes,  “  il  ne 
faut  point  douter  pour  douter ;  il  faut  que  les  doutes  nous  servent  de 
planclie  pour  parvenir  &  la  verite.  Il  ne  faut  point  qu’on  puisse  re- 
procher  aux  vrais  philosophes  ce  que  le  fameux  Casaubon  repondit  a 
ceux  qui  lui  montrerent  la  Salle  de  la  Sorbonne,  et  lui  dirent  qu’on  y 
avoit  dispute  duran-t  quelques  siecles ;  ‘Qu’y  a-t-on  conclu’?  leur 
dit-il.” 


240 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  V. 


and  pre¬ 
parative. 


Negation 
of  belief 
entails  the 
eclipse  of 
all  know¬ 
ledge. 


growth.1  True  scepticism  is  often  made  to  do 
service  for  positive  unbelief,  and  more  especially 
of  theological  postulates.  But  this  is  to  con¬ 
found  cause  with  effect,  a  logical  aspect  of 
Thought  in  general  with  its  application  to  the 
results  of  a  particular  inquiry.  If,  however, 
scepticism  can  issue  only  in  chronic  incredulity, 
the  prospect,  blank  indeed  for  Religion,  whose  very 
soul  is  faith,  might  prove  equally  so  for  all  cer¬ 
tainty  whatsoever.  There  is  a  faith  which  pre¬ 
cedes  and  lies  at  the  root  of  all  scientific  proof. 
There  is  a  faith  which  belongs  equally  to  its 
most  cherished  triumphs.  “We  call  its  discoveries 
sublime ;  but  the  sublimity  belongs  not  to  that 
which  they  reveal,  but  to  that  which  they  sug¬ 
gest.”  2  And  thus  the  mind  of  man,  the  consum¬ 
mate  outcome  of  a  practically  infinite  evolution, 
would,  if  deprived  of  faith,  be  reduced  to  the  con¬ 
dition  of  an  organ  destitute  of  all  objective  en¬ 
vironment  or  appropriate  function.  Such  a  theory 
of  things  is  simply  inconceivable  and  disastrous. 
Perilous  times  may  come,  as  ere  now  they  have 

1  “  Though  there  are  many  who  describe  our  own  time  as  an  un¬ 
believing  time,  it  is  by  no  means  sure  that  posterity  will  accept  the 
verdict.  No  doubt  it  is  a  sceptical  and  critical  age,  but  then  scep¬ 
ticism  and  criticism  are  the  very  conditions  for  the  attainment  of 
reasonable  belief.” — Tylor,  Iiist.  Prim.  (7.,  I.  253. 

2  Prof.  Goldwin  Smith,  Lectt.,  p..  48.  He  adds:  “and  that  which 
they  suggest  is  that  through  this  material  glory  and  beauty,  of  which 
we  see  a  little  and  imagine  more,  there  speaks  to  us  a  Being  Whose 
nature  is  akin  to  ours,  and  Who  has  made  our  hearts  capable  of  such 
converse.” 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


241 


cast  a  cold  shade  upon  the  enthusiasm  of  religion 
and  the  fortunes  of  mankind.  We  may  “  fear  as 
we  enter  into  the  cloud/'  and  “  the  love  of  many 
may  wax  cold.”  But  dark,  indeed,  must  be  the 
prospect  which  shuts  out  altogether  and  always 
from  the  soul  of  man  its  faith  in  Grod,  in  the 
reality  of  its  own  instincts,  in  its  personal  immor¬ 
tality.  Such  a  view  of  human  life  and  of  the 
universe  is  mournful,  from  its  very  hopelessness, 
beyond  recall,  beyond  redress.1  But  sometimes  it 
shows  darkest  the  nearest  before  dawn ;  and  there 
is  good  cause  to  ask  whether  it  be  not  so  now.2 

§  10.  For  Religion  in  some  shape  is  a  neces¬ 
sity,  not  a  weakness,  of  the  heart.  Philosophically 
viewed,  it  supplies  in  Revelation  a  remedy  for  that 
confession  of  Nescience  which  constitutes  the  sum 
of  Natural  Religion.  In  the  highest  stage  of 

1  This  has  been  thus  exquisitely  expressed : — 

Mourn  not  for  them  that  mourn 
For  sin’s  keen  arrow  with  its  rankling  smart. 

God’s  hand  will  bind  again  what  He  hath  torn, 

He  heals  the  broken  heart. 

But  weep  for  him  whose  eye 
Sees  in  the  midnight  skies  a  starry  dome 
Thick  sown  with  worlds  that  whirl  and  hurry  by, 

Yet  give  the  heart  no  home : 

Who  marks  through  earth  and  space 
A  strange  dumb  pageant  pass  before  a  vacant  shrine, 

And  feels  within  his  inmost  soul  a  place 
Unfilled  by  the  Divine. 

D.  Greenwell,  Carmina  Cruets. 

2  Compare  Luther,  Ausleg.  der  Genesis ,  c.  xliv.  17  (ap.  Bunsen, 
God  in  Hist.,  III.  240)  ;  and  Ozanam  ( Civiiis .,  I.  3.1),  who  says  rheto¬ 
rically,  “  Providence  loves  such  surprises.” 

R 


Forecast 
of  the 
reconcilia¬ 
tion  of 
revelation 
and 

science. 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  V. 


242 


Co-exist¬ 
ence  of 
Chris¬ 
tianity 
with  ad¬ 
vancing 
civiliza¬ 
tion. 


civilization  the  purest  form  must  ultimately  prevail. 
Such  we  hold,  and  even  by  opponents  has  been 
admitted,  to  be  the  faith  of  Jesus  Christ.1  It  is 
not  here  contended  that  the  influences  of  civiliza¬ 
tion  and  of  Christianity  are,  in  fact,  identical.  Each 
may  owe  much  to  the  other  :  and  both  something 
to  the  mutual  alliance  of  their  individual  force. 
It  may  be  that  each  moves  in  a  distinct  sphere, 
with  separate  action,  and  to  appearance  separate 
interests.  But  if  it  be  urged  that  in  the  admitted 
advance  of  human  affairs  intellectual  enlightenment 
is  the  cause,  Protestantism  or  any  other  form  of 
Christian  truth  but  an  effect ;  it  is  enough  to 
reply,  that  thus  at  least  they  co-exist ;  the  religion 
of  Christ  in  its  purest  form  is  the  religion  of  civi¬ 
lization.  Nor,  in  saying  this,  do  we  undervalue 
the  benefits  of  Knowledge  and  Science  as  true 


1  “  Le  monde  sera  eternellement  religieux  ;  et  le  Christianisme  dans 
un  sens  large  est  le  dernier  mot  de  la  religion.” — Renan,  u.  s.  “  Deism,” 
he  adds,  “  cannot  he  the  final  term  of  religion ;  for  it  is  not  truly  a 
religion  at  all :  it  is  a  scientific  conclusion.”  The  following  sentences, 
written  nearly  half  a  century  since,  are  now  doubly  interesting : — “  Wo 
confess,  the  present  aspect  of  spiritual  Europe  might  fill  a  melancholic 
observer  with  doubt  and  foreboding.  It  is  mournful  to  see  so  many 
minds,  noble,  tender,  and  high-aspiring,  deserted  of  that  religious 
light  which  once  guided  all  such  :  standing  sorrowful  on  the  scene  of 
past  convulsions  and  controversies,  as  on  a  scene  blackened  and  burnt 
up  with  fire :  mourning  in  the  darkness  because  there  is  desolation,  and 
no  home  for  the  soul ;  or,  what  is  worse,  pitching  tents  among  the 
ashes,  and  kindling  weak,  earthly  lamps,  which  we  are  to  take  for 
stars.  This  darkness  is  but  transitory  obscuration:  these  ashes  are  the 
soil  of  future  herbage  and  richer  harvests.  Religion,  Poetry  is  not 
dead;  it  will  never  die.  Its  dwelling  and  birth-place  is  in  the  soul 
of  man,  and  it  is  eternal  as  the  being  of  man.”— Carlyle,  Miscell.,  I.  72. 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


243 


elements  of  progress ;  or  seek  to  stem  and  turn 
aside  the  tide  of  advancing  culture.  It  is  folly 
even  to  wish  to  reverse  a  movement  in  human 
affairs  which  is  definite  and  uniform  in  operation. 

It  is  a  question  of  fact  whether  Christianity  has 
not  or  is  not  moved  along  with  it,  mingling  with 
its  advance,  and  assimilating  its  effects.  “  It  is 
the  peculiarity  of  the  religion  of  the  Bible,”  it 
has  been  well  said,  “  that  whatever  be  the  aspect  of 
the  past,  and  of  the  present ;  in  spite  of  all  glories 
of  what  we  look  back  to,  and  all  discouragements 
in  what  we  see  now,  it  ever  claims  the  future  for 
its  own.” 1 

5  11.  It  is  the  truer,  as  it  is  the  heartier,  faith  Meeting- 

*  .  #  #  points  of 

to  hold  that,  in  the  golden  age  which  Science  now  knowiedg 
ranks  as  to  come,  and  not  as  gone,  Knowledge  and  gion. 
Religion  must  ultimately  coalesce  and  coincide. 

The  one  is  the  science  of  the  visible ;  the  other  of 
that  which,  though  invisible,  is  no  less  real,  no  less 
truly  a  phase  of  Truth  and  Being.  But  if  both 
are  founded  in  the  reality  of  things,  there  must  be 
between  them  a  fundamental  harmony.  For  “  it  is 
incredible  that  there  should  be  two  orders  of  truth 
in  absolute  and  everlasting  opposition.”2  The 

1  Dean  Church,  Univ.  Serin.,  p.  72.  “The  tendency,”  says  Sir  H. 

Maine,  “  to  look  not  to  the  past,  but  to  the  future,  for  types  of  perfection 
was  brought  into  the  world  by  Christianity.” — Ancient  Laiv,  p.  74. 

“  Hopefulness  has  ever  been  a  note  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  It  has  been 
often  mistrusted  and  misapprehended.” — Merivale,  Northern  Nations, 

p.  116. 

2  Herbert  Spencer,  First  Trine.,  p.  21. 

R  2 


244 


OBJECTIONS  TO  THE 


[Lect.  V. 


Unreal 
results  of 
science. 


Ultimate 
relations 
of  know¬ 
ledge  and 
will. 


world  began,  we  are  now  told,  with  Nature-wor¬ 
ship  ;  can  we  on  a  theory  of  evolution  believe  that 
at  its  close  it  will  have  developed  no  higher  form  ? 
The  dangers  at  present  besetting  Christianity  are 
twofold.  There  is  an  ideal  spiritualism  abroad 
devoid  of  an  objective  basis.  Where  current,  it 
brings  Religion  into  contempt.  There  is  also  a 
secularistic  Materialism,  co-ordinate  with  a  worship 
of  Nature. 

Jamjam  efficaci  dat  manus  Scientias. 

Extremes  thus  meet.  We  have  not  now  the  cult 
of  Ceres  or  Dionysus ;  but  under  other  names  the 
forces  of  Heat,  Light,  and  Fecundity  have  taken 
their  place  and  rank.  But  all  such  ultimate,  as¬ 
sumed  entities  are  to  be  deprecated,  even  if  them¬ 
selves  forms  of  one  Universal  Force.  They  are 
questionable,  unscientific  resting-places  in  the  ana¬ 
lysis  of  truth,  which  must,  to  be  complete,  lead  on 
to  the  source  and  origin  of  Force.  There  is  surely 
a  far  higher  boon  in  store  to  be  conferred  by  the 
increasing  light  of  Knowledge,  when  it  shall  be 
poured  not  solely  on  the  simpler  problems  of  the 
physical  world,  but  upon  the  mysteries  of  the  two 
voices  in  man,  the  microcosm  of  the  universe, 
those  jarring  elements  of  Duty  and  Passion,  of  the 
animal  and  the  spiritual,  of  Nature  and  Grace. 
Originally  created  to  be  a  part  of  the  undivided 
system  of  Nature,  working  in  automatic  harmony 
with  the  constitution  of  the  world  around  him. ; 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


245 


in  the  exercise  of  a  will  independent  of  Divine 
Wisdom  and  of  the  laws  it  had  imposed,  Man  fell 
from  his  high  estate.  Only  by  the  reconciliation 
of  his  will  with  perfect  reason,  by  the  recognition 
of  foregone  perversity,  by  the  confession  of  the 
justice  and  the  mercy  of  his  God,  and  by  the  sub¬ 
mission  of  mind  and  spirit  to  the  higher  law  of 
Morality  and  Religion ;  by  these  only,  as  subjective 
personal  conditions  of  his  Redemption,  may  he  hope 
once  more,  in  “the  times  of  restitution  of  all 
things,”  to  find  himself  in  accord  with  a  purified 
Nature,  fulfilling  the  law  of  his  being,  the  com¬ 
mandment  of  his  God,  and  made  “  partaker  of  the 
Divine  Nature.”  So  far,  if  it  be  no  further,  may  the  Tendency 
plummet  of  finite  Thought,  led  by  the  indications  ledge  to 
of  Revelation,  sound  the  depths  of  the  nature  and  moral  evil, 
existence  of  evil  in  the  world.  Potentially  real,1 
a  secondary  development  of  things,  its  very  being 
and  action  may  be  but  temporary  and  relative, 

1  Cf.  Orig.  c.  Cels.,  VI.  lv.  Thus  August.,  Civ.  D.,  XI.  9.  Mali  nulla 
natura  est;  sed  amissio  boni  mali  nomen  accepit;  following  the 
more  ancient  opinion,  to  kukov  to  dvvdfxei  dyaOov.  Arist.,  Metaph. 

N.  iv.  ovk  ear  1  to  kcikov  7 rapa  rd  7rpdyfxaTa.  Comp.  Plato, 

Thecet.  176,  A.  So  also  Basil  ( ffexam .  Horn.,  ii.).  Leibnitz,  Theod., 
p.  550.  “  Quant  a  la  cause  du  mal  il  est  vrai  que  le  diable  est  l’auteur 

du  peche  ;  mais  l’origine  du  peche  vient  de  plus  loin,  la  source  est  dans 
Pimperfection  originale  des  creatures,”  &c.  His  own  explanation  of  this 
is  well  known.  “  Dieu  a  permis  le  mal,  parce  qu’il  est  enveloppe'  dans  le 
meilleur  plan  qui  se  trouve  dans  la  region  des  possibles.” — lb.,  p.  601. 

“  II  se  peut  que  tous  les  maux  ne  soient  aussi  qu’un  presque  neant  en  com- 
paraison  des  biens  qui  sont  dans  l’univers.” — p.  509.  Bishop  Butler 
(following  August.,  Con f.,  II.  v.),  “  There  is  nothing  in  the  human  mind 
contradictory,  as  the  logicians  speak,  to  virtue.” — Anal.,  I.  iii.  <f  There 
is  no  such  thing  as  love  of  injustice,  oppression,  treachery,  ingratitude,’ 


246  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  V. 

conditioned  by  a  finite  state  of  existence  and  know¬ 
ledge,  admitting  of  ultimate  exjolanation.  That 
which  is  individual  is  in  its  own  nature  imperfect : 
and  imperfection  is  a  transient  form  of  evil.  But 
the  will  of  man  is  confessedly  individual,  personal. 
the^co-CS  The  inherent  conflict  of  self-interest  with  the 
of  religion. common  good  can  only  he  overcome  by  the  con¬ 
viction  that  it  is  through  conformity  to  the  uni¬ 
versal  law,  as  the  expression  of  the  wisdom  of  the 
Creator,  to  the  whole  constitution  of  things,  that 
the  perfection  of  the  individual  is  reached.1  This, 
if  any,  must  be  the  lesson  of  ultimate  civilization, 
Coincident  and  it  is  a  lesson  in  the  accomplishment  of  which 

with  1(^0 

work  of  the  Faith  of  Christ  may  be  expected  to  take  a  large 
tion.U  share.  64  Christianity,”  it  has  been  well  said,2  “  has 
been  revealed  as  a  social  and  as  a  personal  power 
in  the  richest  variety  of  circumstances.  It  remains 
for  us  to  harmonize  the  idea  of  society  and  self  as 
they  are  seen  to  be  harmonized  in  the  teaching  of 
the  Apostles.  In  this  lies  the  highest  problem  of 
philosophy  and  the  most  worthy  aim  of  life.  4  The 
pr  ize  is  noble,’  as  Plato  said  of  the  corresponding 
problem  in  his  age, 4  and  the  hope  is  great.’  ”  In  this 

&c. — Serm .,  I.  Mr.  Mackay  (Progress  of  Intellect ,  I.  482)  has  touched 
this  subject  with  much  profundity  and  learning.  Physical  evil  must  of 
course  be  distinguished  from  the  moral  and  metaphysical  notions.  It 
may  prove  to  be  a  necessary  tendency  of  general  laws,  and  to  redound 
in  many  ways  to  the  formation  of  moral  excellencies. 

1  Compare  Mr.  Mill,  Exam .,  p.  510,  who  quotes  an  observation  of  M. 
Reville  respecting  human  freedom.  “  La  liberte  complete,  reelle,  de 
Tliomme  est  la  perfection  humaine,  le  but  a  atteindre.” 

2  Prof.  Westcott,  Cont.  Bev.,  VI.  417. 


Lect.  V.]  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


24  7 


law  and  scale  of  progress,  that  which  we  call  evil 
must  itself  have  been  foreseen,  and  in  a  manner  fore¬ 
ordained  and  provided  for,  by  the  act  of  Eternal 
Wisdom.  One  day  “  the  depth  of  the  riches  of 
that  wisdom  and  knowledge,”  (now  “  past  finding 
out,”)  will  be  revealed,  its  ways  disclosed  ;  and 
the  sufferings  of  “  a  bondage  of  corruption” 1  will 
show  all  unworthy  to  be  compared  with  the  glory 
that  shall  dawn  upon  the  world  become  the  king¬ 
dom  of  the  Lord  and  of  His  Christ. 

§  1 2.  “  The  Master  of  all  who  have  knowledge.” 2 
Such  is  the  title  claimed  by  Dante  for  Aristotle,  the  J?ietlifrom 
Prince  of  ancient  thought.  Shall  it  not  hereafter 
be  given  to  One  greater  than  Aristotle,  who  shall 
rise  up  in  the  judgment  with  the  men  of  this  gene¬ 
ration  and  condemn  them,  as  many  as  have  divorced 
Science  from  Faith.  For  in  that  day  secular  philo¬ 
sophy,  however  glorious,  will  be  transmuted  into 
divine.  The  very  course  of  the  integration  of  Tendency 
human  Knowledge  may  be  expected  to  lead  to  the  knowledge 

perfection. 

1  “  L’imperfection  qui  accompagne  la  solution  du  corps  pourroit  donner 
lieu  au  sentiment  d’une  perfection  plus  grande,  qui  etoit  suspendue  ou 
arretde  par  la  continuite  qu’on  fait  cesser  ;  et  a  cet  egard  le  corps  seroit 
comme  une  prison.”— Leibnitz,  Works,  p.  603. 

2  “  II  Maestro  di  color  chi  sanno.”  “  La  plus  forte  tete  de  toute 
l’antiquite,  le  grand  Aristote,”  says  M.  Comte  {Phil.  Pos.,  IV.  38), 
perhaps  from  an  unconscious  predilection ;  for  it  was  very  anciently 
remarked  that  Plato  referred  all  to  Mind,  Aristotle  to  Law.  The 
medieval  reputation  of  Aristotle,  whom  the  Schoolmen  placed  almost 
on  a  level  with  the  Fathers,  was  according  to  Mr.  Lecky  (Hist.  Pat., 

I.  417),  due  to  the  early  heretics.  See  Dean  Milman,  Lat.  Christ., 

VI.  267. 


Inherent 
defects  of 
positive 
know¬ 
ledge. 


248  OBJECTIONS  TO  THE  [Lect.  V. 

reception  of  one  common,  universal  Beligion,  when 
the  relations  of  Matter  to  a  central  Force  shall  be 
understood.  The  latest  generalization  of  the  in¬ 
ductive  reason  will  be  comprehended,  as  alone  it 
can  be  comprehended,  through  the  intuition  of  Him 
(for  u  we  shall  see  Him  as  He  is  ”),  Who  is  the 
Author  and  Cause  of  all  things,  “  Who  is  Alpha 
and  Omega,”  “  the  Beginning  and  the  End,”  the 
“  First  and  the  Last.”  In  that  day  “  whether  there 
he  knowledge,  it  will  vanish  away,”  because  u  we 
know  but  in  part.”  What  is  there  in  the  loftiest 
human  speculation  which  should  exempt  it  from  the 
fate  of  all  finite  things?  “ Positive  knowledge1 
does  not  and  never  can  fill  the  whole  region  of 
possible  thought.  At  the  utmost  reach  of  discovery 
there  arises  and  must  ever  arise  the  question 
what  lies  beyond  ?  Science  is  a  gradually  in¬ 
creasing  sphere,  and  every  addition  to  its  surface 
does  hut  bring  it  into  wider  contact  with  surround¬ 
ing  ignorance.  But  if  knowledge  cannot  mono¬ 
polize  consciousness  ; 2  if  it  must  always  continue 

1  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer,  First  Principles,  pp.  16,  17.  The  same 
thought  that  the  material  world  cannot  of  itself  contain  a  revelation  of 
the  Hi\ ine,  the  finite  ot  the  Infinite,  occurs  in  Tennyson 

Forerun  thy  peers,  thy  time  :  and  let 
Thy  feet  millenniums  hence  be  set 
In  midst  of  knowledge  dreamed  not  yet. 

Thou  hast  not  gained  a  real  height ; 

Nor  art  thou  nearer  to  the  light, 

Because  the  scale  is  infinite. 

2  “II  n’y  a  que  Dieu  qui  yoie,  comment  ces  deux  termes  moi  et 
l  existence  sont  lies,  c’est-a-dire,  pourquoi  j’existe.”  —  Leibnitz,  Non- 
veaux  Fssais,  IV.  vii.  7 


Lect.  V.l  PROGRESS  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


249 


possible  for  the  mind  to  dwell  upon  that  which 
transcends  knowledge,  then  there  can  never  cease 
to  he  a  place  for  that  which  is  of  the  nature  of 
Religion.”  For  what  region  can  be  found  in  all 
the  realms  of  Science,  which  is  not  relative  only  to 
our  present  living  powers  and  to  the  world  we  now 
inhabit  ?  What  necessity 1  can  be  claimed  for  the  Laws  of 

nature  de- 

Laws  of  Nature,  as  they  are  known  to  us,  still  less  void  of  the 

^  idea  of 

for  the  several  facts  which  represent  and  engender  necessity, 
them,  which  can  resist  the  sentence  of  mutability 
so  legibly  written  upon  them?  Knowledge  then, 
as  alone  we  now  possess  it,  is  of  time,  not  of 
eternity  ;  it  is  marred  by  the  imbecillities  of  man’s 
understanding.  “  Eye  hath  not  seen,  nor  ear 
heard,  neither  have  entered  into  the  heart  of  man 
the  things  which  Grod  hath  prepared  for  them  that 
love  Him.”  But  “  when  that  which  is  perfect  is 
come,  then  that  which  is  in  part  shall  be  done 
away.” 

1  See  Sir  W.  Hamilton,  Appendix  to  Reid ,  p.  971,  who  quotes 
Spinoza  (de  Intell.  Emend.,  §  108) ;  “  ideas  quas  claras  et  distinctas 
formamus  ita  ex  sola  necessitate  nostras  naturas  sequi  videntur,  ut 
absolute  a  sola  nostra  potentia  pendere  videantur :  confusas  autem 
contra.”  Chalmers’s  noble  argument  for  the  doctrine  of  immortality 
from  man’s  capacities  for  knowledge  is  well  known.  “  But  for  the 
truth  of  immortality  man  would  be  an  anomaly  in  nature  ....  The 
whole  labour  of  this  mortal  life  would  not  suffice  for  traversing,  in  full 
extent,  any  one  of  the  sciences.  And  yet  there  may  lie  undeveloped  in 
his  bosom  a  taste  and  talent  for  them  all,  none  of  which  he  can  even 
singly  overtake.  For  each  science,  though  definite  in  its  commence¬ 
ment,  has  its  outgoings  in  the  Infinite  and  the  Eternal.” — Bridg . 

Treatise ,  Pt.  I.  sub  fin. 


<• 


t 


l 


LECTURE  VI. 


THE  PERMANENCE  OF  CHRISTIANITY  INFERRED 
FROM  THE  CHARACTER  OF  ITS  INFLUENCE. 


“Ne  quisquam  nos  aliena  tantum  redarguisse,  non  autem  nostra 
asseruisse  reprehenderet ;  id  agit  pars  altera  operis  hujus.” — Augustine, 
Retract .,  II. 

“  Imperium  facile  his  artibus  retinetur,  quibus  initio  partum  est.” — 
Sallust,  Bell.  Catil II.  iv. 


' 


' 

•  . 


■  ■ 


*  • 


LECTURE  VI. 


“  Who  is  he  that  over cometh  the  world ,  but  he  that  believeth  that 
Jesus  is  the  Son  of  God ?  ” — i  oT)U  ti.  5. 

§  1.  r  I  AHE  direct  or  positive  proof  originally  pro-  stag®  °f 
posed  to  be  offered  in  these  Lectures  in  <iuiry* 
respect  of  the  permanence  of  the  Christian  Religion 
led  first  to  the  inquiry,  what  are  the  vital  forces  of 
any  Religion  ;  and  next,  in  what  degree  are  these 
exhibited  in  the  past  history  and  present  condition  of 
Christianity  ?  These  forces,  common  to  all  systems  ^1[?rces 
of  Religion,  may  be  compared  with  the  powers  of  gjonsf j 
nutrition,  reproduction,  and  growth  in  organic 
bodies.  Such  are  the  hold  exercised  by  the  theory 
of  belief  upon  the  spirit  and  conscience  of  its  pro¬ 
fessors  ;  the  tendency  of  the  system  to  extend  itself 
by  conversion ;  and,  thirdly,  the  power  of  assimi¬ 
lating  healthfully  the  varying  conditions  of  progres¬ 
sive  civilization.  With  the  last  of  these  lines  of  proof 
we  have  been  indirectly  occupied  throughout  the 
four  preceding  Lectures.  For  the  objections  which  ^rePuy 
have  been  considered  to  the  progress  of  Christianity 
have  been  such  as  belong  to  the  highest  stages  of 
culture  and  scientific  research  as  yet  reached  by  the 
most  civilized  portion  of  mankind.  Lastly,  since 

O  O 

every  form  of  Religion  asserts  for  itself  an  absolute  menl  for 


already 

consi¬ 

dered. 


Conclud- 


254 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


the  per¬ 
manence 
of  Chris¬ 
tianity 
from  the 
character 
of  its  doc¬ 
trines. 


Present 
inquiry 
into  the 
nature  and 
extent  of 
the  in¬ 
fluence  of 
Chris¬ 
tianity  as 
evidenced 
at  different 
periods. 


possession  of  Divine  Truth,  its  announcements  are 
to  be  considered  final,  or,  at  least,  as  preparative 1  to 
one  complete  scheme.  A  concluding  argument  will 
hence  arise  in  favour  of  the  truth  of  Christianity 
from  the  universality  of  its  tenets  and  their  adapta¬ 
tion  to  the  history  and  circumstances  of  mankind, 
warranting  in  this  manner  its  assumption  of 
doctrinal  finality.  If  its  morality  is  sound  and 
universal ;  its  type  of  character  perfect  and  com¬ 
plete,  not  partial,  national,  local,  or  generic,2  but 
correspondent  to  the  unity  of  our  race  ;  if  its  reve¬ 
lations,  replacing  earlier  creeds  and  inheriting  all 
they  held  of  truth,  reach  on  to  the  horizon  of 
humanity,  and  assure  for  ever  the  destinies  of  man, 
we  need  not  greatly  fear  for  the  future  of  a  Reli¬ 
gion  which  can  only  be  coeval  with  our  race. 
We  now  proceed  to  examine,  in  the  first  place,  the 
character  and  extent  of  the  influence  exercised  by 
Christianity  at  various  periods  on  the  consciences 
of  its  converts. 

§  2.  It  has  been  asked  by  a  leading  thinker  of 

1  Such  as  the  Mosaic  system;  which  cannot  therefore  be  properly 
attacked,  as  it  has  been  by  Kant  and  others  (see  Religion  inn erhalb,  &c., 
Werke,  VI.  301,  ed.  Hartenstein),  as  not  Divine,  because  it  did  not  preach 
immortality.  Warburton’s  proposition  on  this  subject  is  well  known. 

The  ceremonial  law  was  succeeded  by  a  pure  and  spiritual 
voi ship,  equally  adapted  to  all  climates,  as  well  as  to  every  condition 
of  mankind.’  Gibbon,  c.  xv.  Compare  Palmer  ( Treatise  on  the  Church , 
I.  vii.)  on  the  catholicity  of  Christianity.  “  The  New  Testament,” 
says  Prof.  Seeley,  Lect.  and  Essays ,  p.  276,  “  is  the  text-book  of  uni¬ 
versal  or  natural  morality.”  On  the  objection  that  if  Christianity  be 
in  harmony  with  human  nature,  it  may  be  viewed  as  a  human  in¬ 
vention,  see  Merivale,  Conv.  of  N.  Nations ,  p.  3. 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


255 


our  time,1  “  what  are  the  conditions  necessary  to 
constitute  a  religion  ?”  “  There  must,”  he  replies, 

“  be  a  creed,  or  conviction,  claiming  authority  over 
the  whole  of  human  life ;  a  belief  or  set  of  beliefs 
deliberately  adopted  respecting  human  destiny  and 
duty,  to  which  the  believer  inwardly  acknowledges 
that  all  his  actions  ought  to  be  subordinate.  More¬ 
over,  there  must  be  a  sentiment  connected  with 
this  creed,  or  capable  of  being  evoked  by  it,  suffi¬ 
ciently  powerful  to  give  it,  in  fact,  the  authority 
over  human  conduct  to  which  it  lays  claim  in 
theory.”  In  other  words,  the  success  of  a  religion 
may  be  held  to  result  from  the  relation  of  its 
doctrines  to  the  organ  of  belief  in  man,  from  the 
convictions  which  it  furnishes  to  the  faculty  of  Faith. 
For  Faith,  the  outcome  of  our  spiritual  nature  in  its 
apprehension  of  Grod,  is  the  vital  spark  of  all  Reli¬ 
gion.  If  Faith  be  on  the  wane,  there  is  a  canker  at 
the  root  of  the  creed.  The  external  organization, 
the  ecclesiastical  arrangements,  may  look  vigorous 
enough,  but  the  end  draws  on.  In  criticising,  then, 
the  claims  of  a  religion  to  acceptance  from  the  side 
of  experience,  i.  e.  from  its  past  success  and  present 


Prelimi¬ 
nary  ex¬ 
amination 
of  the 
elements 
necessary 
to  the  suc¬ 
cess  of  a 
religious 
system, 


viz.  the  re¬ 
lation  of  its 
doctrines 
to  the 
principle 
of  faith. 


1  Mr.  J.  S.  Mill,  A.  Comte  and  Positivism ,  p.  133.  He  adds  :  “  It  is 
a  great  advantage,  though  not  absolutely  indispensable,  that  this  senti¬ 
ment  should  crystallize,  as  it  were,  round  a  positive  object — if  possible, 
a  really  existing  one — though  in  all  the  more  important  cases  only 
ideally  present.  Such  an  object  Theism  and  Christianity  offer  to  the 
believer.”  Mr.  Lecky,  II.  i?.,  I.  389,  speaking  of  the  first  ages  of 
Christianity,  remarks  that  “  it  was  then  strictly  a  religion ;  that  is  to 
say,  it  consisted  of  modes  of  emotion,  and  not  of  intellectual  proposi¬ 
tions.” 


256 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


condition,  and  in  inferring*  from  these  grounds  its 
ulterior  prospects,  regard  must  be  had  to  the  work 
which  lies  before  it,  to  the  end  which  it  proposes 
to  itself  for  accomplishment.  Now,  all  positive 
.Religions1  lay  claim  to  some  measure  of  Divine 
ah  reh-  Revelation  ;  i.  e.  to  communications  from  Grod  to 

gions 

properly  man  beyond  the  ordinary  modes  of  information 

vehicles  of  ^  ^ 

to'hurnan  anc^  ^now^e^e‘  These  it  is  its  province  to  propa- 
nature,  gate  amongst  mankind.  Any  religion,  then,  which 

should  altogether  divest  itself  of  mysteries,  the 
meeting-points  between  Nature  and  that  which 
transcends  it ;  satisfied  with  the  simple  proclamation 
of  moral  truths,  however  refined,  or  with  a  re¬ 
publication  of  the  so-called  Religion  of  Nature, 
which  is,  in  fact,  the  apotheosis  of  moral  abstrac¬ 
tions  ;  thus  carrying  no  further  message  to  the  spirit 
and  higher  reason  of  man ;  any  such  religion  may  on 

1  It  lias  been  said  very  truly  that  so-called  Natural  Religion  exists 
only  in  books.  Religions  which  have  vital  force  and  influence  are 
positive  religions  ;  that  is,  they  make  for  themselves  a  Church,  and 
rites,  and  dogmas.  These  dogmas  are  the  solutions  of  the  great  problems 
which  have  ever  disquieted  the  mind  of  man — the  origin  of  the  world, 
the  origin  of  evil,  its  expiation,  the  future  of  our  race. 

Quid  sumus  et  quidnam  victuri  gignimur. 

Mr.  Lecky,  H.  Eat.,  I.  182,  points  out  that  “  Protestant  Rationalism 
regards  Christianity  as  designed  to  preside  over  the  moral  development 

of  mankind . In  its  eyes  the  moral  element  of  Christianity  is  as 

the  sun  in  heaven,  and  dogmatic  systems  are  as  the  clouds  that  intercept 
and  temper  the  exceeding  brightness  of  its  ray.”  In  p.  335,  he  seems 
himself  to  incline  to  the  view  that  dogmatic  systems  are  a  provisional 
arrangement  for  semi-barbarous  periods,  though  he  admits  that  Chris¬ 
tianity  is  the  solitary  instance  “  of  a  religion  not  naturally  weakened  by 
civilization.”  Pietism  in  the  hands  of  Spener,  Francke,  &c.,  as  also 
the  Remonstrants,  early  endeavoured  to  separate  religious  morals  from 
dogma.  The  movement  has  terminated  in  Strauss. 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


25  7 


these  very  accounts  be  suspected.  It  falls  short  of 
the  due  operation  of  Eeligion  in  itself ;  which,  as  a 
function  of  human  nature,  has  its  own  appropriate 
work  by  the  realization  of  which  it  must  stand  or 
fall.  That  work,1  though  the  contrary  is  not  unfre-  are  not 
quently  asserted,  is  not  identical  with  the  inculcation  withThe^ 
of  morality,  however  high,  however  pure.  The  oTmo-atl°n 
Science  of  Ethics  falls  legitimately  within  the  ken  rallty‘ 
of  human  knowledge,  capable  of  improvement  and 
advance.  But  when  it  has  led  man  to  the  threshold 
of  Eeligion,  a  sphere  is  discovered  to  him  from  which 
he  has  not  borrowed  morality.2  Thus  the  doctrines 
of  a  religious  system,  while  properly  in  accord  with 
morality,  transcend  by  their  nature  the  limits  of  its 
teaching.3  Morality  is  present  in  them,  even  if  as 


1  The  most  elementary  forms  of  religion  seem  to  afford  little  trace 

of  ethics.  Compare  Mr.  Tylor,  Prim:  Cult.,  I.  386.  In  Confucianism, 
on  the  other  hand,  ethics  overpower  and  extinguish  the  religious  ele¬ 
ment.  See  Dolliuger,  Gentile  and  Jew ,  I.  56-8 ;  Legge ,  II.  130,  319. 
“  To  give  oneself  earnestly  to  the  duties  due  to  men,  and  while  respect¬ 
ing  spiritual  beings  to  keep  aloof  from  them,  may  be  called  wisdom,” 
was  the  maxim  and  practice  of  its  founder.  It  is  not  strange  to  find, 
from  Mr.  Cooper  {Pioneer  of  Commerce ),  that  his  temples  at  the  present 
day  are  deserted.  Lange,  Gesch.  des  Mater ialismus,  p.  537,  says,  “  Die 
Religionen  haben  urspriinglich  gar  nicht  einmal  den  Zweck  der  Sittlich- 
keit  zu  dienen.”  See  Buckle,  Hist.  Civ.,  II.  303.  “  The  Church,” 

writes  Dean  Hook,  “  was  not  incorporated  to  inculcate  a  code  of  morals. 

. The  inculcation  of  morality  is  an  incident  of  Christianity,  and 

not  of  its  essence.” — Lives  of  Archbishops,  N.  S.,  I.  3. 

2  Compare  Guizot,  Civ.  in  K,  I.  87,  ed.  Bohn.  Paley’s  Evid.,  Pt.  II. 
c.  ii.,  on  the  morality  of  the  Gospel.  Christianity,  strictly  speaking,  is 
no  new  code  of  morals,  but  an  appeal  to  the  highest  moral  experience. 

3  “  There  is  a  fine  line,”  writes  Coleridge,  “  which,  like  stripes  of 
light  in  light,  distinguishes,  not  divides,  the  summit  of  religious  Morality 
from  spiritual  Religion.” — A.  B.,  p.  81. 


S 


258 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


Relation  of  a  vital,  yet  as  a  rudimentary  element.  This  fact 

morality  to  .  .  .  "  ,  .  oil  *r-l 

a  system  of  is  evident  on  a  comparison  ot  barbarous  with 
i  ei^ion.  cjvjjjze(j  paces.1  To  condemn  a  creed  on  moral 

grounds  is  not,  therefore,  properly  conclusive, 
though  it  is,  no  doubt,  the  case  that  in  proportion 
to  its  truth  it  will  encourage  a  purer  and  more 
elevated  morality,2  which  varies  in  most  men  in 
proportion  to  their  practical  belief  in  Grod  and  His 
Proper  promises.  Its  real  test  on  the  experimental  side 

test  of  the  p  #  x 

success  of  lies  in  the  accomplishment  of  its  true  specific  end. 

a  religion 

And  this  would  seem  to  be  so  to  educate,  to  mould 
and  inform  the  spirit  of  man,  as  to  restore  it  to 
its  divine  image,  and  prepare  it  for  a  future  con¬ 
tinuous  existence.3  This  work  involves,  indeed, 
moral  issues.  The  correlations  and  interaction  be¬ 


tween  the  life  that  now  is  and  its  after-stage  very 
soon  become  mutually  interpenetrated.  The  spirit, 
as  part  at  least  of  the  principle  of  personality  in 
man,  is  inseparable  from  those  acts  or  decisions  of 
the  will  which  determine  its  character,  and  as 

includes  Revelation  instructs  us,  its  ultimate  destiny.  Reli- 

moral  in-  __  J 

fiuence,  gion  then,  which  occupies  itself  with  the  spiritual 

but  us  u 

secondary  1  Compare  Mr.  Tylor,  Prim.  C.,  II.  326. 

element.  2  jjence  the  fine  lines  0f  Persius : 


Composi turn  jus  fasque  animo  sanctosque  recessus 
Mentis,  et  incoctum  generoso  pectus  honesto ; 
thee  cedo  ut  admoveam  templis  et  farre  litabo. 

3  Mr.  Lecky  well  observes,  H.  E.  M.,  I.  363-4,  “  Reverence  and  humi¬ 
lity,  a  constant  sense  of  the  true  majesty  of  God,  and  of  the  weakness 
and  sinfulness  of  man,  and  a  perpetual  reference  to  another  world,  were 
the  essential  characteristics  of  Christianity,  the  source  of  all  its  power,  the 
basis  of  its  distinctive  type.” 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


259 

element  in  man,  cannot  be  divorced  from  the 
morality  which  it  must  teach  or  tolerate.1  Its  con¬ 
verts  will  act  upon  the  principles  of  their  belief, 
which  supply  them  with  a  new  series  of  motives, 
and  these  will  accordingly  become  evident  in  the 
conduct  and  disposition  of  the  believer.  In  this  A  moral 

.  ,  test  thus 

manner  a  moral  test  may  be  applied  of  the  character  applicable 
and  efficacy  of  the  Revelation,  for  it  may  fail  on 
either  side.  On  the  one  hand,  it  may  be  found  to 
put  “  bitter  for  sweet,  and  sweet  for  bitter  it  may 
put  “ darkness  for  light,  and  light  for  darkness;”2 
that  is,  its  tenets,  as  in  the  case  of  many  heathen 
idolatries,  may  corrupt  the  moral  sense  ;  its  positive 
enactments  or  promises  may  confound  the  natural 
law  of  right.  On  the  other  hand,  its  power  of 
moral  suasion,  though  wholesomely  directed,  may 
be  feeble  and  inoperative.  Its  voice  may  utter  no 

1  Mr.  Buckle,  I.  425  (after  Hallam)  traces  the  scientific  separation  of 
theology  from  morals  to  Bishop  Cumberland.  Mr..  Pattison  ( Ess.  and 
Itev.,  p.  256)  remarks  very  truly  that  those  ages  in  which  moralily 
alone  has  been  most  spoken  of  have  ever  been  those  in  which  it  has  been 
least  practised. 

Isaiah  v.  20.  T-hus  Bishop  Butler,  A.nal.}  II.  c.  iii. :  “  Though  objections 
against  the  evidence  of  Christianity  are  most  seriously  to  be  considered, 
yet  objections  against  Christianity  itself  are  in  a  great  measure  frivolous ; 
almost  all  objections  against  it,  excepting  those  which  are  alleged  against 
the  particular  proofs  of  its  coming  from  God.  I  express  myself  with 
caution,  lest  I  should  be  mistaken  to  vilify  reason ;  which  is,  indeed, 
the  only  faculty  we  have  wherewith  to  judge  concerning  anything,  even 
Revelation  itself :  or  be  misunderstood  to  assert  that  a  supposed  revelation 
cannot  be  proved  false  from  internal  characters.  For  it  may  contain 
clear  immoralities  or  contradictions ;  and  either  of  these  would  prove 
it  false.  Nor  will  I  take  upon  me  to  affirm,  that  nothing  else  can  pos¬ 
sibly  render  any  supposed  revelation  incredible.”  And  again  :  “  It  is 
the  province  of  reason  to  judge  of  the  morality  of  the  Scripture,”  &c. 

S  2 


26o 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


of  a  prac¬ 
tical  na¬ 
ture. 


Different 
theories 
as  to  the 
original 
success  of 
Chris¬ 
tianity. 


A _ _ _ — — — — — - — — - 

uncertain  sound,  but  yet  it  may  fail  to  nerve  man¬ 
kind  for  the  battle  with  evil.  The  standard,  then, 
of  the  truth,  and  hence  of  the  permanence  of  a  reli¬ 
gious  system,  apart  from  its  particular  evidences, 
will  appear  first  and  properly  in  the  character  of 
the  hold  gained  by  it  on  the  spirit  and  conscience 
of  those  who  profess  it ;  then,  by  consequence,  but 
in  a  secondary  degree,  in  its  general  moral  effects 
as  exhibited  in  practice.  If  without  marked  effect, 
or  if  immoral  in  tendency,  a  presumption  arises 
against  its  truth,  stronger  or  weaker  in  the  former 
case  in  proportion  to  the  length  of  date  and  nature 
of  the  circumstances  attending  its  operation.  Suc¬ 
cess  upon  certain  occasions  affords,  it  is  true,  but 
slender  guarantee  for  truth,  for  the  result  may  be 
differently  explained.  But  when  itself  the  issue  of 
unfavourable  conjunctures  and  contrary  to  ordinary 
expectation,  or  when  steadily  continuous,  however 
slow  the  process,1  it  raises  in  the  mind  an  almost 
instinctive  conviction  of  its  providential  character 
and  ultimate  triumph. 

§  3.  Yery  different  reasons,  as  might  be  expected, 
have  been  assigned  to  the  rise  and  first  successes  of 
Christianity,  according  to  the  varying  temperament 

1  “  The  Christian  body,”  says  Dr.  Mozley  ( B .  L.,  p.  140),  “  is  enlarged 
by  growth  and  stationariness  combined :  each  successive  age  con¬ 
tributing  its  quota,  and  the  acquisition,  once  made,  remaining . 

And  the  same  principle  of  growth  can  at  last  convert  the  world :  how¬ 
ever  slow  the  process,  the  result  will  come,  if  Christianity  always  keeps 
the  ground  it  gets :  for  that  which  always  gains  and  never  loses  must 
ultimately  win  the  whole.” 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRIS  TT A  NI T  Y. 


261 


of  particular  thinkers.  It  has  been  regarded  by 
some  in  the  light  of  a  moral  protest  against  gene¬ 
ral  and  overwhelming  corruption.  By  others  it  is 
viewed  as  a  stage  in  the  history  of  superstitions,  a 
phase  and  a  necessary  phase  of  mental  enthusiasm. 

By  others  it  is  admitted  to  have  embodied  a  large 
moral  advance.  By  some,  again,  its  rapid  pro¬ 
gress  is  explained  through  the  advantage  of  an 
unrivalled  organization.  But  those  who  attribute 
its  success  to  its  moral  excellences,  neglect  to  take 
into  account  its  qualities  as  a  religion.  They  ignore  Neglect  its 

‘  qualities  as 

the  fact  that  it  is  to  these,  and  not  to  any  mere  a  religion, 
ethical  superiority,  that  its  real  advance  is  due. 

But,  if  it  be  regarded  as  hut  one  among  the  many 
superstitions  which  had  preceded  it  in  East  and 
West,  the  fact  of  its  success,  and  still  more  of  its 
continuance,  remains  yet  to  be  explained.  To  the 
liberal  zeal  of  Christianity,  freed  from  the  fetters  of 
the  Mosaic  Law,  Gibbon  assigns  much  of  the  success  view  of 

.  Gibbon 

of  its  preaching.1  But  other  superstitions,  111  the 
times  of  the  Empire,  were  equally  yielding,  equally 


1  Decline  and  Fall,  c.  xv. :  “  Under  these  circumstances  Christianity 
offered  itself  to  the  world,  armed  with  the  strength  of  the  Mosaic  Law, 
and  delivered  from  the  weight  of  its  fetters,”  &c.  If,  indeed,  the 
remarks  of  this  great  historian  be  understood  of  a  comparison  between 
the  genius  of  the  Christian  religion  and  the  class-interests  of  previous 
systems  as  well  as  of  the  existing  state  of  Roman  society,  they  might 
well  be  received  as  a  fair  tribute  to  the  intrinsic  superiority  of  Chris¬ 
tianity.  M.  Littre  (Itudes  sur  les  Barbares  et  le  Moyen-Age,  p.  2)  has 
some  true  and  fine  remarks  on  the  sterility  of  the  results  arrived  at  by 
Gibbon,  who  in  recounting  the  Fall  of  the  Empire,  takes  no  heed  of  the 
regeneration  of  the  world  by  Christianity. 


262 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


inade¬ 

quate. 


True 
causes 
of  its 
triumph. 


pliant  in  receiving  proselytes,  without  being 
equally  rewarded.  And  the  intolerance  of  the 
simple-minded  followers  of  Jesus  for  all  other 
forms  of  belief;  their  impolitic  vehemence  against 
immoral  institutions  ;  their  somewhat  narrow  im¬ 
patience  of  current  philosophical  systems ;  their 
jealous  secrecy  as  regards  the  mysteries  of  the 
faith,  while  little  in  accord  with  the  liberality  to 
which  such  great  results  have  been  attributed,  are 
known  to  have  proved  stumbling-blocks  to  a  gene¬ 
ral  reception  of  the  new  Religion.  It  does  not 
seem  to  have  occurred  to  this  writer  that  the 
secret  of  the  success  of  Christianity  may  well  have 
lain  in  the  harmony  of  its  doctrines  with  the  re¬ 
ligious  needs  of  the  time,  the  deliverance  which  it 
held  forth  from  impending  ruin  at  the  end  of  the 
world,  by  many  deemed  so  near ; 1  the  inward 
calm  and  satisfaction  which  it  wrought  on  the 
minds  of  its  converts ;  the  stores  of  spiritual  strength 
which  it  instilled  under  circumstances  of  much 
worldly  depression.  These  were  its  legitimate  in¬ 
struments  of  triumph.2  The  miracles  which  it 
claimed,  whatever  part  they  may  have  had  in  the 


1  This  subject,  it  is  well  known,  is  especially  brought  forward  by 
Gibbon,  u.  s.  But  he  treats  it  in  the  light  of  a  vulgar  superstition, 
which"  must  have  been  at  least  as  dangerous  through  the  discovery  of 
its  fallacious  expectation,  as  powerful  in  the  cogency  of  the  alarm 
which  it  created. 

2  “  No  other  religion  ever  combined  so  many  forms  of  attraction  as 
Christianity,  both  from  its  intrinsic  excellence,  and  from  its  manifest 
adaptation  to  the  special  wants  of  the  time.” — Lecky,  II.  E.  M .,  I.  419. 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


263 


persuasion  of  unbelievers,  were  shared  by  it  with 
rival  faiths.  Its  virtues,  like  its  doctrines,  were 
certainly  its  own.  The  pen  of  our  great  historian, 
though  dipped  in  gall,  does  not  disallow  the  moral 
reformation  introduced  by  Christianity,  enforcing,  Testified 
as  it  did,  repentance  for  sin  and  blamelessness  °f  formation 
life.1  “He  that  nameth  the  name  of  Christ,  let  effected, 
him  depart  from  iniquity,”  was  long  the  rule  and 
mark  of  Christian  converts.  Nor  was  this  a  result 
of  which  the  causes  remain  unexplained.  They 
are  patient  in  the  character  of  the  Religion 
preached,  as  well  as  in  the  circumstances  of  the 
age  which  received  it.  The  doctrines  of  Christ- ^racter 
ianity  contained  within  them  the  core  of  man’s tnnes- 
moral  regeneration,  a  supply  to  his  spiritual  desti¬ 
tution,  motives  to  repentance  laid  in  the  atoning 
work  of  God  for  man ;  motives  to  new  action, 
founded  evermore  on  promises  of  Divine  grace.2 
Hence  the  peculiar  characteristics  of  Christian 
virtue,  issuing  in  a  new  moral  type  built  upon  the 

1  For  testimonies  to  an  admitted  moral  superiority  on  the  part  of  the 
first  Christians,  compare  Pliny,  Epp.,  X.  97 ;  Galen  (ap.  Gieseler,  I. 

126,  ed.  Clark) ;  Justin  M.,  Apol.,  II.  i.  xii. ;  Farcen.,  c.  xxxv. ; 
Atlienag.,  Leg.,  c.  ii.  xi. ;  Ep.  ad  Diogn.,  c.  v.  vi. ;  Tertull.,  Apol., 
c.  45  ;  Origen,  c.  Cels.,  III.  30 ;  VII.  48,  49 ;  I.  67  :  to  ovopa  tov 

'Irjcrov  .  .  .  epnoiei  Oavpaaiav  tivcl  7 rpaoTrjTa,  kcu  KaraaToXrjv  tov  rjdovs, 

Kcu  (\n\av6  peon  lav,  Kai  ypjyo-roTr/ra,  k a\  rjpepoTrjTa  iv  roly  prj  81a  ra 
(3ia>TLKa,  rj  rivas  ypeias'  avOpcoiviKas  vnoKpcvapevoLS,  dXXa  napci  8e£a- 
peVois  yvricricos  tov  nepl  Oeov  Kal  XpiaTov  nai  Trjs  eaopevgs  Kpiaecos 
\6yov. 

2  “  The  force  which  Christianity  has  applied  to  the  world,  and  by 
which  it  has  produced  that  change  in  the  world  which  it  has,  is,  in  a 
word,  the  doctrine  of  grace.” — Mozley,  B.  L .,  p.  180. 


264 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


model  of  a  crucified  Saviour;  the  humbleness;  the 
self-sacrifice;  the  forgiving  spirit;  the  .obligation 
of  remembering  the  poor ;  the  enforced  chastity  of 
a  redeemed  body  become  the  temple  of  the  Spirit 
of  God ;  the  faith  in  a  life  to  come,  showing  itself 
patient  of  tortures  and  of  death. 

§  4.  Ihe  wider  yet  far  more  searching  analysis,1 
instituted  since  Gibbon  wrote,  of  the  causes  which 
of^hJ state  PrePared  the  Greek  and  Roman  civilizations  for 

tion  ItihTs  tiie  mfiltratlori  °f  Christianity,  lias  seen  in  the 
period.  new  spirit  which  stole  upon  the  philosophy  of  the 

age,  in  its  broader  and  more  eclectic  character 
under  the  cosmopolitan  system  of  the  Empire,  in 
its  introspective  and  subjective  tone,  a  temper  of 
thought  not  ill-suited  to  the  announcement  of 
Christian  morality.2  But  the  increasing  corrup- 
tion^°andP"  ^on  ^ie  0lder  world,  against  which  Stoicism 

stdtiofne'  ?pent  iLs  stren£th  in  vain>  Respite  the  wholesome 
influences  of  daily  duties  and  domestic  intercourse, 
called  for  more  drastic  and  intrinsic  remedies. 
The  need  of  a  religion  which  might  reconcile  and 

1  See  Mr.  Lecky’s  powerful,  and  in  many  respects  adequate,  inquiry 
into  the  moral  causes  which  preceded  the  rise  of  Christianity  in  the 
Eoman  Empire.-  H.  E.  M.,  I.  c.  iii.  Compare  also  Dean  Merivale 
{Hist,  of  the  Empire,  VI.  356  ft.) ;  and  especially  Ne under ’s  (I.  6-117) 
masterly  review  of  the  religious  state  of  the  world  at  the  coming  of 
Christ;  together  with  Dollinger,  Gentile  and  Jew  I  347  370*  TT 
284-9. 

2  See  Prof.  Lightfoot’s  learned  disquisition  on  the  relations  of 
Stoicisin  to  Christianity  (St.  Paid  and  Seneca),  in  his  Commentary 
on  the  Epistle  to  the  Philippians.  He  shows  that  Stoicism  itself  was 
indebted  to  Oriental  sources,  and  probably  to  Christian  teaching. 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


265 


in  practice  absorb  the  highest  truths  of  conflicting' 
philosophical  systems  was  more  and  more  felt.  Its 
sanctions  secured  to  the  sonl  of  man  what  centuries 
of  argument  and  discussion  had  failed  to  effect. 

No  closer  relation  than  this  needs  to  be  sought 
between  Pagan  morality  and  Christian  influence. 

The  fixed  idea  of  the  religion  of  the  time  was  that  «to  ^ 
of  a  national  Providence,  addressed  on  the  part  of ldeas- 
man  by  ceremonial  observances.1  The  disintegra¬ 
tion  of  social  superstitions  was  due  to  their  own 
inability  to  meet  the  wants  of  the  period  and  the 
tendencies  of  the  age.2  Credulity  gave  way  before 
a  real  and  growing  anxiety  to  learn  and  know  the 
truth — truth  which  would  set  men  free  from  many 
a  cruel  and  degrading  practice.  The  same  pro-  The  dr- 

0  .  cumstances 

vidential  arrangement  which,  having  first  created  favourable 

°  •  ,  ,  to  die  ht- 

the  Macedonian  Empire  and  ordained  the  Koman  troduction 

,  -j  .  of  Chris- 

Conquest,  had  prepared,  against  the  promulgation  tianity, 
of  Christianity,  a  language  common  alike  to  East 
and  West,3  had  reserved  for  it  an  era  markedly 

1  It  culminated  in  the  Deification  of  Emperors.  For  an  example  of 
the  declining  condition  of  the  old  state-religion,  see  Tac.,  Ann.,  III.  58. 

2  Thus  Chrysostom  writes  (d.  Babyla,  Opp.,  II.  540)  :  in  ouSeW 

£vo')(\r)6e'i<Td  7 rore  Trjs  'E XXrjviKrjS  beicniaipovlas  rj  nXavrj  a(j)  eavTTjS 
tafiecrOri,  Kai  nepl  iavrrjv  iuneae,  KaOdnep  to)V  (rcnparoiv  ra  TijKrjiovi 
napadoOevTct  paxpa,  Kai  prjbevos  avra  fiXanrovros  avropara  (frOeiperai 
Kal  Si aXvflevra  Kara  piKpov  dcfiavi^erai.  See  ap.  Gieseler,  I.  321.  Com¬ 
pare  Plutarch  (d.  Superstit.,  c.  xxxiii.).  It  was  remarked  that  there 
were  no  martyrs  for  heathen  doctrines.  “  Quis  eorum,”  says  August., 
in  Psalm.  141,  §  20,  “  comprehensus  est  in  sacrificio,  cum  his  legibus 
ista  prohiberentur,  et  non  negavit  V  ”  “  Paganism,”  writes  Dean  Meri- 

vale,  “  had  no  tap-root  of  moral  renovation.” 

3  “  Graeca  leguntur  in  omnibus  fere  gentibus,”  says  Cicero,  pro  Archid , 


266 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


favourable  for  the  introduction  of  the  new  doc¬ 
trines,  combining,  as  they  did,  a  basis  of  historical 
facts  with  an  appeal  to  personal  religious  con¬ 
sciousness.  £-  No  other  religion,”  it  has  been  truly 
observed,  “  had  ever  united  so  many  distinct  ele¬ 
ments  of  power  and  attraction;  so  much  ethical 
reality  with  a  profound  sympathy  in  human  trials  ; 
sbweri"gtoSO  mucl1  feeling  with  so  much  truth.” 2  This, 

tive^ tenets.  hoWeyCT’  must  lead  us  to  forget  that  it  is  in 
the  distinctive  tenets  of  Christianity  that  we  must 

look  for  the  true  causes  of  this  very  combination : 
in  the  spiritual  convictions  which  it  aroused  and 
satisfied ;  in  the  religious  emotions  which  it  con¬ 
trolled  ;  in  the  promises  which  it  alone  fulfilled.3 

c.  x^  Plutarch  considered  it  the  mission  of  Alexander,  rrjv  'EXXdSa 
(TTreLpai. '  Compare  Neander,  I.  67,  and  some  remarks  by  Mr.  J.  S.  Mill 
( Positivism ,  p.  24).  See  also  Droysen  (Gesch.  des  Eellenismus).  It 
must  not  he  forgotten  that  the  tendencies  of  an  age  are  only  the  conse¬ 
quences  of  its  historical  circumstances. 

1  “  UP  to  Uns  time  there  had  never  existed  among  mankind  any 
historical  truth  on  which  a  religious  faith  could  he  based ;  nor  yet  any 
p  nlosophic  faith  founded  on  a  personal  religious  consciousness  residing 
within  man’s  own  breast,  and  finding  its  credentials  and  interpretation 
there.  ‘  What  is  truth  ?  ’  asks  Pilate.  ‘  What  can  this  barbarian  teach 
ns .  exclaims  the  Athenian. ’’—Bunsen,  God  in  Hist.,  III.  pp  66  67 
E.  T.  My  line  of  thought  in  this  Lecture  leads  me  to  contrast  the 
permanent  change  of  moral  teaching,  which  accompanied  Christianity 
with  the  world  as  it  found  it.  This  was,  however,  fundamentally  due 
to  the  miraculous  element  which  was  inherent  in  its  enouncements 

This  course  of  reflection  is  most  ably  worked  out  by  Dr.  Mozley 
( Bamp .  Led.,  p.  170  ff.).  J  y 

2  Lecky,  H.  E.  M.,  I.  412-414. 

3  If  Christianity  had  been  only  or  principally  an  intellectual  move¬ 
ment  consequent  on  previous  phases  of  thought,  it  would  not  have 
commenced  with  the  poor.  Compare  Neander,  I.  9.  Dean  Milman, 
La  m  Christ  I.  451,  has  some  good  remarks  on  the  strangeness  and 
originality  of  the  fundamental  Christian  ideas  to  the  Roman  world  and 
the  consequent  difficulty  of  their  reception. 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


267 


In  these  and  not  in  its  moral  worth,  however 
highly  estimated,  lay  the  talisman  of  its  triumph. 

The  doctrine  of  salvation  by  belief,  “  which,  then, 
for  the  first  time,  flashed  upon  the  world,”  gave 
the  real  death-blow  to  philosophical  scepticism.1 
It  was  the  new-born  consciousness  of  sin,  which,  instances, 
awakening  remorse,  lit  up  the  sense  of  responsi¬ 
bility  and  turned  it  inward  on  the  soul,  that 
invested  human  life  with  a  solemnity  and  import 
never  before  felt ;  which  opened,2  as  they  had 
never  before  been  stirred,  the  lips  of  prayer. 

Pliny  had  deemed  it  but  a  pollution  to  the  Infinite 
Spirit  of  Grod  to  concern  Himself  with  the  petty 
affairs  of  men.3  It  was  the  Christian’s  privilege  of 
suffering  for  and  with  a  suffering  Redeemer 4  (thus 

1  “  Apud  Ciceronem  et  Platonem  aliosque  ejusmodi  scriptores  multa 
sunt  acute  dicta  et  leniter  calentia ;  sed  in  iis  omnibus  non  invenio, 

Venite  ad  Me.” — Augustin.,  in  Matt.  xi.  28.  See  Conf, .,  VII.  ix.  13. 

Carlyle  remarks :  “  The  old  world  knew  nothing  of  conversion.  Instead 
of  an  Ecce  Homo,  they  had  only  some  Choice  of  Hercules.  It  was  a 
new  attained  progress  in  the  moral  development  of  man ;  hereby  has 
the  Highest  come  home  to  the  bosoms  of  the  most  limited.”— S.  B., 

р.  136.  For  individual  examples  of  the  manner  in  which  Christianity 
wrought  upon  educated  minds,  see  Justin  Martyr  (Dial.  c.  Try  phi), 
Augustine  (Conf.),  Synesius,  and  the  Recogn.  Clement.,  I.  sub  init. 

2  See  M.  Denis,  Idees  Morales,  II.  234,  and  Dollinger,  Gentile  and 
Jew,  II.  75-7.  A  true  Roman  prayer  may  be  found  in  Cato,  lie  Bust., 

с.  41. 

3  Hist.  Nat.,  II.  iv.,  VII.  i. :  “  Irridendum  vero,  agere  curam  rerum 
humariarum  illud,  quidquid  est  summum.  Anne  tarn  tristi  atque 
multiplici  ministerio  non  pollui  credamus  dubitemusve  ?  ”  Comp.  Cic., 

Nat.  D.,  II.  ii. ;  Invent.,  I.  xxix. ;  and  Seneca,  Epp.,  41,  95.  He  thinks 
Providence  sometimes  cares  for  men. 

4  Compare  Clem.  Rom.,  ad  Cor.  I.  xlix.,  and  Ep.  ad  Diogn.,  c.  x. 

Prof.  Lightfoot  (u.  s.,  p.  326)  well  observes :  “  The  moral  teaching  and 
example  of  our  Lord  will  ever  have  the  highest  value  in  their  own  pro¬ 
vince  ;  but  the  core  of  the  Gospel  does  not  lie  here.  Its  distinctive 


268 


7  HE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


This 
influence 
wholly  a 
spiritual 
one, 


no  mere  ascetic  truth  that  pain  is  good,  and  no 
evil)  5  the  requital  ot  love  for  love,  of  sympathy 
for  man  in  return  for  the  sympathy  of  Grod ; 1 
which  transmuted  the  dross  of  universal  luxury 
into  the  fine  gold  of  the  noblest  self-sacrifice  and 
heroic  self-control.  And  thus,  lastly,  it  was  far 
more  the  hope  of  eternal  life  than  the  fear  of  ever¬ 
lasting  toiment,  which,  to  the  Christian  convert, 
dignified  earthly  sorrows  and  levelled  worldly 
enjoyments. 

§  5.  Thus  the  spiritual  character  of  the  hold 
exercised  by  primitive  Christianity  on  the  lives 
and  consciences  of  its  converts  must  be  considered 
a  fact  beyond  dispute.  It  is  attested  both  by  the 


chaiacter  is  that  in  revealing  a  Person  it  reveals  also  a  principle  of  life _ - 

the  union  with  God  in  Christ,  apprehended  by  faith  in  the  present,  and 
assured  to  us  hereafter  by  the  Resurrection.  This  Stoicism  could  not 
give,  and  therefore  its  dogmas  and  precepts  were  barren.” 

“  Ihe  great  principle  of  vicarious  suffering ,  which  forms  the  centre 
of  Christianity,  spreads  itself  through  the  subordinate  parts  of  the 
system,  and  is  the  pervading  if  not  the  invariable  law  of  Christian 
beneficence.”— I.  Taylor,  Nat.  Hist,  of  Enthus .,  p.  162.  “  The  pre¬ 

cepts  and  examples  of  the  Gospel  struck  a  chord  of  pathos  which  the 
noblest  philosophies  of  antiquity  had  never  reached.  For  the  first 
time  the  aureole  of  sanctity  encircled  the  brow  of  sorrow,  and  invested 
it  with  a  mysterious  charm.” — Lecky,  Hist.  Bat.,  II.  266. 

2  In  this  matter  M.  Comte  takes  a  truer  view  than  Gibbon  or 
Mr.  Lecky.— See  Phil.  Pos.,  V.422.  Christianity,  he  thinks,  preserved 
to  itself  the  advantage  of  leaving  the  nature  of  future  pains  and  rewards 
open.  See  also  IV.  190.  On  the  influence  of  immortality  as  a  Christian 
motive,  compare  Lucian,  Mort.  Peregrin.,  §  13.  On  the  current  views 
of  immortality,  see  Dollinger,  Gentile  and  Jew ,  II.  143-6.  M.  Rio 
remarks  that,  the  earliest  delineations  of  Christian  art  represent  ideas 
of  joy  and  felicity.  Conceptions  of  Hell  and  Purgatory  come  much  later, 
and  irom  heathen  sources.  There  were  Roman  philosophers  who  erected 
to  their  friends  tombs  dedicated  “  Somno  adernali.”— Orelli,  I.  p.  262. 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


269 


voice  of  Christian  Apologists,  by  the  unwilling 
witness  of  adversaries,1  and  still  more  convincingly 
by  institutions  and  social  and  moral  changes  which 
remain  as  monuments  of  the  influence  of  nascent 
Christianity.  Testimonies  to  the  active  moral  force  but  ex- 

•'  ...  hibiting 

of  the  new  Religion  abound,  indeed,  in  the  earlier  moral 

0  #  results. 

Fathers.2  Virtues,  hitherto  little,  if  at  all,  recog¬ 
nized,  now  made  rudimentary  graces ;  passive 
endurance ;  forgiveness  of  injuries ;  resignation 
under  calamity,  not  as  a  necessity,3  hut  as  a  duty 
of  the  human  spirit ;  humility  and  meekness ; 
benevolent  unselfish  effort  replacing  a  narrow  instances. 
Egoism  ;4  fortitude  under  pain  and  death  for  the 
cause  of  belief ;  a  sense  of  sin,  not  as  an  outward 
offence,  but  as  an  inward  stain  ;  a  strengthened 

1  As  Epictetus,  M.  Aurelius,  Julian.  Cf.  Lucian,  d.  Mort.  Pereg .,  XIII. 

2  E.g.  Justin  M.,  Apol .,  I.  xiv.  xxv. ;  II.  xii.  Dial.  c.  Tr.,  110, 

119,  131.  Tertullian,  Apol.,  xxxix.  Minuc.  F.,  c.  ix.  Lactant., 

D.  Inst.,  III.  26 ;  Y.  18.  Origen,  c.  Cels.,  I.  67.  See  the  temperate 
statements  of  Gieseler,  I.  298,  and  Robertson,  C.  H.,  I.  274.  Compare 
some  vivid  remarks  of  Mr.  Allies,  Formation  of  Christianity,  pp.  269, 

270:  “  The  Christian  faith  had  laid  its  hand  on  the  individual  man,” 

&c. 

3  In  striking  contrast,  therefore,  to  the  Mahometan  virtue  of  sub¬ 
mission,  perhaps  implied  in  the  name  “  Islam.”  In  Phil.  Pos.,  IV.  190, 

Comte  coldly  analyzes  this  quality,  which  he  thinks  only  compatible 
with  the  acceptance  of  laws  of  Nature :  “  Quant  a  la  resignation  reli- 
gieuse  et  surtout  Chretienne  elle  n’est,  a  vrai  dire,  malgre  tant  d’empha- 
tiques  eloges  qu’une  prudente  temporisation  qui  fait  supporter  les 
malheurs  presents  en  vue  d’une  ineffable  felicite  ulterieure.” 

4  “  Fecerunt  itaque  civitates  duas  amores  duo,  terrenam  scilicet  amor 
sui  usque  ad  contemptum  Dei,  coelestem  vero  amor  Dei  usque  ad  con- 
temptum  sui.” — August.,  Civ.  D.,  XXIV.  xxviii.  “  Le  principe  qui 
dominait  l’antiquite  etait  l’egoisme  du  plus  fort,  tantot  celui  de  l’Etat, 
tantot  celui  de  l’individu.  La  personnalite  de  l’liomme,  sa  liberte,  ses 
droits  naturels,  etaient  meconnus.” — Schmidt,  Essai,  p.  116. 


270  THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VI. 

conviction  of  the  freedom  and  spirituality  of  the 
human  will ;  conversion  from  habits  of  vice, 
sudden,  yet  lasting  ;  the  consolations  of  faith  and 
prayer  as  the  outpouring  of  the  soul  to  its  Re¬ 
deemer  ;  the  renovation  of  domestic  virtues  and 
proprieties,  impaired  by  the  vices  of  Roman  society 
and  the  evil  effects  of  slavery ;  the  duty  of  alms¬ 
giving  and  active  charity  ; 1  the  recognition  of  the 
rights  of  conscience  and  of  religious  freedom  ;  the 
severance  of  spiritual  from  political  obligation  ;  a 
higher  estimate  of  the  value  of  human  life;  the 
sense  of  a  real  brotherhood  among  mankind,  in¬ 
volving  religious  equality  with  slaves;2  a  moral 
ideal  suited  to  high  and  low  ;  the  replacement  of 
hereditary  priesthoods  by  common  religious  func¬ 
tions  ;  an  operative  faith  in  the  reality  of  another 
world ;  these  and  other  kindred  ideas,  pregnant 
with  fruitful  effects,  bore  witness  to  the  power  and 
originality  of  the  Faith  of  Christ  in  regenerating 
the  heart  of  man,  when  first  it  broke,  like  the  light 
of  morning,  on  the  world,3  as  upon  men  awakened 

1  “  Ad  hanc  partem  (sc.  beneficent  iaj)  philosophorum  nulla  prascepta 
sunt.” — Lactant.,  D.  Inst.,  VI.  x. 

2  Comp.  Archdeacon  Lee’s  Ledt.  on  Ecdes.  Hist.,  pp.  24-29  ;  and  on 
the  operation  of  the  Christian  doctrines,  Merivale,  Ledt.  j3p.  155, 156.  On 
the  general  services  of  Christianity  at  this  epoch,  Ozanam,  Civilis .,  I.  c.  i. 

(ocnrep  oi  tov  vtvvov  cnvocreLuapevoL  evflea)?  eyprjyopcio'av. — Clem. 
Alex.,  Peed.,  I.  vi.  §  28.  Mr.  Mill  on  Liberty,  p.  22,  has  some  dis¬ 
paraging  remarks  on  the  ease  with  which  Christian  precepts  may  be 
acquiesced  in  without  their  gaining  a  practical  hold  on  the  believer. 
Lange,  Gesch.  des  Mat.,  pp.  530,  531,  observes  truly,  that  amidst  many 
analogies  between  the  condition  of  modern  society  and  that  of  the 
Homan  Empire,  the  differences  induced  by  Christian  ideas  are  palpable. 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


271 


out  of  slumber  to  renewed  and  vigorous  life.  The 
extinction,  gradual  but  complete,  of  gladiatorial 
shows;1  of  exposure  of  infants,  and  infanticide;2 
the  establishment  of  orphanages,  refuges,  alms¬ 
houses,  and  hospitals;3  the  emancipation  of 
slavery  ; 4  the  sanctification  of  the  marriage  tie ; 5 
the  foundation  (at  least  after  the  decay  of  all 
Imperial  institutions)  of  primary  and  public 
schools  ;6  are  standing  proofs  of  the  tendency  and 
influence  of  Christianity  in  apprehending  and  ad¬ 
vancing  the  true  welfare  of  mankind.  These  are 

1  Compare  here  Ozanam,  u.  s.,  II.  c.  ii. ;  and  Luthardt,  A'polog ., 
pp.  243,  244,  E.  T. ;  Lecky,  Hist.  Rat.,  II.  264. 

2  TeKvoyovovaiv  aXX  ov  piiTTovcri  ra  yevvi. opeva. — Ep.  ad  Diogn.,  C.  V. 
See  Milman,  Lat.  Clir.,  I.  347. 

3  See  Gieseler,  II.  60.  X^porpocfna  and  opcfiavorpocfua  are  known 
to  date  from  the  fourth  century;  so  also  7rra>xorpo(/)<ria,  voaoKopeia, 
gevcoves,  and  £ei /oSoyeta.  The  BaaiXeias  was  a  hospital  for  lepers.  The 
charitable  offices  of  the  Parabolani,  Fossani,  or  Komdrai  (“  ultimum  illud 
et  maximum  pietatis  officium  peregrinorum  et  pauperum  sepultura,” 
Lactant.,  VI.  xii.),  should  be  added.  On  the  non-existence  of  hospitals 
and  infirmaries  in  Pagan  times,  see  Schmidt,  u.  s.,  p.  75. 

4  Comp.  Robertson,  C.  H.,  II.  229.  Gregory  Naz.  and  Chrysostom 
insist  largely  on  the  duty ;  but  the  first  instances  are  long  before  :  e.  g. 
Hermes,  Prefect  of  Rome  under  Trajan,  freed  1250  ;  Chromatius  under 
Diocletian,  1400,  &c.  Under  this  head  fall  all  measures  for  the  im¬ 
provement  of  serfs  by  Gregory  the  Great,  the  laws  of  Constantine  and 
Justinian,  &c.  Comp.  Guizot,  Civ.  en  Fr.,  II.  125,  III.  137,  ed.  Bohn. 
Milman,  Lat.  Chr.,  I.  338,  365.  Lecky,  LI.  Rat.,  II.  256-258.  The 
Romans  often  exposed  and  put  to  death  sick  slaves.— Suet.,  Claud., 

C.  XXV. 

6  Even  with  the  Jews,  marriage  was  only  a  political  institution. 
Contrast  with  this  the  touching  treatise  of  Tertull.,  ad  Uxor.,  II.  ix., 
&c.  Compare  Milman,  Lat.  Chr.,  I.  344. 

6  The  first  mention  of  Christian  primary  schools  occurs  in  the  fourth 
century  in  Chrysostom  and  Basil.  See  in  Guizot,  u.  s.,  I.  351 ;  II.  100. 
There  is  a  treatise  by  M.  Lalanne  on  the  Influence  des  Feres  de  VEglise 
sur  V education  publique. 


Vast  moral 
reforms. 


272 


THE .  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


Difficulty 
of  follow¬ 
ing  it  into 
private 
and  per¬ 
sonal  life. 


its  fuller  triumphs,  the  records  of  a  world-wide 
humanity,  new  in  motive  and  spirit  as  obligatory- 
on  the  followers  of  Him  Who  died  for  all  men. 
Yet  it  is  far  more  in  its  action  upon  individuals, 

where  History  leaves  no  trace ;  in  calm  and  silent 

•/ 

influences  shed  upon  personal  character,  as  genera¬ 
tion  after  generation  has  worked  its  work  and 
passed  ;  in  the  purity  of  domestic  life,  in  souls 
attuned  to  the  practice  of  human  charities,  to  the 
privilege  of  suffering,  to  a  departure  full  of  im¬ 
mortality  ;  that  the  real  work  of  Christianity  as 
compared  with  other  religions  must  be  sought  and 
found.1  Biography,  more  than  History,  is  its  true 
record.  Never  before  was  the  reflection  of  a 
Divine  Image  mirrored  so  clearly  in  the  human 
soul  or  in  the  practice  of  mankind.  The  summits 
of  Christian  heroism  in  martyr,  saint,  and  con¬ 
fessor,  first  touched  with  the  tints  of  Heaven,  were 


1  See  some  good  remarks  in  Robertson,  C.  Hist .,  I.  3C3  ;  and  Lecky, 
IL  E.  M.,  II.  156: — “Christianity  has  suffered  peculiarly  from  this 
cause.  The  spheres  in  which  its  superiority  over  other  religions  is 
most  incontestable,  are  precisely  those  which  history  is  least  capable 
of  realizing.”  “  The  record  of  the  spiritual  Church,”  says  Isaac  Taylor, 
Enthus .,  p.  191,  “  is  ‘  on  high,’  not  in  the  tomes  that  make  our  libraries 
proud.”  “  The  influence  of  religion,”  writes  Paley,  Ev.,  IT.  c.  vii., 
“  must  be  perceived,  if  perceived  at  all,  in  the  silent  course  of  private 
domestic  life  .  .  .  The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  within  us.  That  which 
is  the  substance  of  the  religion  ;  its  hopes  and  consolations  ;  its  inter¬ 
mixture  with  the  thoughts  by  day  and  by  night ;  the  devotion  of  the 
heart ;  the  control  of  appetite ;  the  steady  direction  of  the  will  to  the 
commands  of  God,  is  necessarily  invisible.  Yet  upon  these  depend  the 
virtue  and  the  happiness  of  millions.”  Christianity,  as  a  system  of 
human  restoration,  works  from  the  individual  to  the  general.  See  a 
fine  passage  in  Milman,  Lot.  Chr.,  I.  24. 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


273 


the  first  to  shine  out  in  the  full  radiance  of  moral 
splendour.  But  the  warm  rays  were  not  long  in 
winning  their  way  to  valley  and  to  plain,  shedding 
abroad  their  gifts  of  fruitfulness  and  life. 

§  6.  Thus  the  hold  of  primitive  Christianity  on 
the  minds  and  consciences  of  men  was  both  of  the 
strongest  and  of  the  highest  kind.  For  it  sufficed 
to  effect,  through  much  individual  suffering  and 
sacrifice,  a  moral  revolution  in  the  world;  and 
completely  changed,  by  moral  force  alone,  the  exist¬ 
ing  religions.  And  it  must  be  observed  that  the 
changes  effected,  fraught  indeed  with  very  impor¬ 
tant  moral  results,  were  brought  about  by  strictly 
spiritual  convictions.  These  are  to  be  assigned  as 
the  true  causes  of  the  movement.  Here  lies  the 
real  point  at  issue  with  much  of  the  critical  philo¬ 
sophy  of  our  time.1  It  is  evidently  possible,  in 
reviewing  the  career  of  Christianity,  to  scan  it 
from  more  than  one  point  of  view,  provided  only 
that  these  be  not  mutually  inconsistent.  Charges 
of  failure  are  necessarily  incompatible  with  admis¬ 
sions  of  success.  But  the  allowed  successes  may 
be  variously  explained.  The  benefits  effected  for 
mankind  by  the  Religion  of  Jesus  Christ  can  hardly 
now,  as  facts,  be  disputed,  though  they  have  some¬ 
times  been  forgotten  by  too  hasty  objectors.  At 

1  Neander  (I.  3)  remarks  :  “Because  Christianity  enters  readily  into 
all  that  is  human,  striving  to  assimilate  it  to  its  own  nature,  and  to  in¬ 
terpenetrate  it  with  its  own  power,  it  appears  on  a  superficial  view  as  if 
it  were  itself  only  a  product  resulting  from  the  combination  of  the  dif¬ 
ferent  spiritual  elements  it  had  drawn  together.” 

T 


Superi¬ 
ority  and 
force  of  the 
spiritual 
element  in 
primitive 
Chris¬ 
tianity. 


The  ser¬ 
vices  of 
Chris¬ 
tianity 
sometimes 
assigned  to 
its  posi¬ 
tive  insti¬ 
tutions. 


274 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


present  it  is  more  common  to  attribute  them  to  the 
influence  of  consummate  positive  institutions  ;  or 
at  least  to  the  operation  of  natural  causes  in  such 
a  manner  as  to  eviscerate  all  native  force  and 
vigour  in  the  supernatural  elements  of  Chris¬ 
tianity.  Neither  the  founder  of  Positivism,1  nor  his 
most  discerning  followers,  have  denied  the  signal 
services  of  Christ’s  Religion  to  mankind.  They 
contend,  however,  that  this  has  been  the  result  of 
the  circumstances  of  the  times,  due  really  to  the 
necessary  evolution  of  ideas  in  intellectual  and 

This  view  social  advance.  It  is  important,  therefore,  to 

unfounded.  ^  . 

remark  how  closely  the  effects  of  our  Religion  may 
be  traced  to  the  doctrines  of  its  creed.  No  philo¬ 
sophical  improvements,  no  uprooting  of  effete 
institutions,2  no  craving  after  moral  reforms,  no 

1  Comte  remarks,  Phil.  Pos.,  V.  328,  that  Catholicism  (with  him  the 
embodiment  of  Christianity)  has  never  been  fairly  criticised,  having  con¬ 
stantly  been  the  subject  either  of  unlimited  panegyric  or  boundless  de¬ 
traction.  He  admits  the  earliest  ideal  of  the  Christian  Church  (V.  229), 
viz.  as  an  universal  spiritual  power  independent  of  the  temporal,  to  be  the 
greatest  triumph  humanity  has  yet  achieved.  He  regards  Catholicism 
as  having  done  its  proper  work  from  the  fifth  to  the  thirteenth  centuries, 
placing  the  acme  from  the  middle  of  the  eleventh  to  the  close  of  the 
thirteenth.  Of  this  he  writes  (V.  326) :  “  Le  systeme  catholique  du 
moyen-age  forme  le  chef-d’oeuvre  politique  de  la  sagesse  liumaine.” 
But  everywhere  he  denies  ( e .  g.  V.  418,  419)  that  the  moral  excellence 
of  Christianity  is  due  to  its  doctrines,  but  only  to  its  social  constitution. 
M.  Guizot  (I.  85)  more  truly  observes  that  it  is  “  by  moral  life,  by  in¬ 
ternal  movement  as  well  as  by  order  and  discipline,  that  institutions 
take  possession  of  society.  The  Church  mooted  all  the  great  questions 
which  interest  man :  busying  itself  with  the  problems  of  his  nature 
and  the  chances  of  his  destiny.  Hence  its  great  influence  on  modern 
civilization.” 

2  Thus  M.  Littre  ( Barbares ,  p.  231),  “  Le  Christianisme  naquit  de 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


275 


agitation  for  political  changes,  no  mere  variation 
of  social  conditions,  nor  all  these  combined,  are 
sufficient  to  account  for  the  conversion  to  the  Faith 
of  the  Nazarene  of  the  Roman  world.  The  cha¬ 
racter  and  history  of  that  change  are,  if  dimly, 
adequately  known  and  understood.  A  set  of  facts  its  true 
and  historical  circumstances,  making  up  the  life,  hlbtoiy’ 
and  death,  and  thoughts  of  a  Galilean  peasant, 
won  the  ear  first  of  peasants  like  himself,  of  women 
and  of  slaves  ;x  by-and-by,  of  the  men  of  thought 
and  action ;  and  afterwards  of  nations  and  govern¬ 
ments.  It  was  found  little  by  little  to  contain  the 
elements  of  an  universal  religion,  and  to  proclaim  a 
Revelation  congenial  to  the  wants  of  mankind  at 
large.  In  it  the  ends  of  the  earth  met.  The  leaven 
of  an  Oriental  mode  of  faith  wrought  for  the 
first  time  in  harmony  with  the  genius  of  the  Aryan 
peoples.  But  its  advance  was  through  personal  !ts  °Pera_ 

.  01  tion,  first 

influences,  from  heart  to  heart  still  more  than  from  personal, 

•  i  then  pub- 

mind  to  mind.  Had  Christianity  been  only  orlic> 
principally  an  intellectual  movement,  consequent 

Punion  du  Mcnothcisme  hebreu  avec  la  philosophic  grecque.”  In  pp. 

G5,  68,  he  draws  out  admirably  the  cessation  of  Polytheism  through  the 
“  malaise  religieux  ”  of  the  time.  Christianity,  he  adds,  supervened,  and 
became  for  the  many  what  philosophy  had  been  for  the  few,  a  religion 
essentially  moral  (?)  and  open  to  all ;  &c.  Compare  Mr.  Lecky,  H.  E.  M., 

I.  356,  “  Combining  the  Stoical  doctrine  of  universal  brotherhood,  the 
Greek  predilection  for  the  amiable  qualities,  and  the  Egyptian  spirit  of 
reverence  and  religious  awe,  Christianity  acquired  from  the  first  an 
intensity  and  universality  of  influence  which  none  of  the  philosophies 
it  had  superseded  had  approached.”  This  species  of  Eclecticism  assumes 
everything  and  proves  nothing. 

1  See  Origen,  c.  Cels.,  I.  xxvii.,  III.  ix.  lv. 

T  2 


276 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


called  for 
self-sacri¬ 
fice, 


on  previous  phases  of  speculation,  it  could  not  have 
commenced  with  the  unlettered  and  poor.  The 
mine  of  sympathy,  which  it  opened,  with  all  the 
deepest  wants  of  man’s  spiritual  nature,  never 
afterward  failed  in  its  yield.  In  the  hearts  of  the 
multitude  it  proved  a  source  of  moral  regeneration. 
When  placed  in  the  crucible  of  philosophical  criti¬ 
cism,  it  transmuted  all  baser  elements  of  human 
Thought,  and  survived  the  test.  The  thinkers  of 
Alexandria,  Athens,  and  Rome,  gradually  allied 
themselves  with  its  teaching.  When  subjected  to 
the  rough  handling  of  Barbarian  hordes,  it  still 
conquered.  The  example  of  a  Divine  Life,  the 
sacrifice  of  a  Divine  Atonement,  meeting  the  two 
fundamental  conceptions  of  all  Religion,  ancient  as 
well  as  modern,  the  need  of  Sanctification  and  of 
Justification,  wrought  uniformly  and  universally. 
It  appealed  to  latent  instincts  of  spiritual  belief.1 
Sinful  indulgence  had,  indeed,  to  be  cast  aside. 
Sacrifices,  meet  to  purge  the  conscience,  were  de¬ 
manded  of  habits,  prepossessions,  of  the  ordinary 
weaknesses  'and  average  endurance  of  mankind. 
Women  faced  the  pang  of  separation  more  cruel 
than  death,  the  ruin  of  their  homes,  the  terrors  of 
martyrdom.  Men  counted  the  cost  of  social  degra- 

1  Mr.  Lecky,  Hist.  Bat.,  I.  389,  observes :  “Of  all  systems  the  world 
has  ever  seen,  the  philosophies  of  Ancient  Greece  and  Rome  appealed 
most  strongly  to  the  sense  of  virtue :  and  Christianity  to  the  sense  of 
sin.  The  ideal  of  the  first  was  the  majesty  of  self-relying  humanity  : 
the  ideal  of  the  other  was  the  absorption  of  the  manhood  into  God.” 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


2  77 


dation  and  loss,  and  set  it  down  for  gain.  From 
what  motive  then,  ethical  or  physical  ?  No  doubt 
from  a  sense  of  duty  ;  but  of  what  duty  ?  The 
instinctive  call  to  love  Him,  Who  “  had  first  loved 
them,”  and  to  imitate  His  goodness.1  A  new  con- based  on 

the  imita- 

ception  of  the  gift  of  life,  of  the  value  of  man’s  fion  of 
soul,  of  its  responsibilities,  of  its  capacities,  of  its 
dangers,  and  its  hopes,  was  opened  out  before  them 
in  the  Incarnation  and  Intercession  of  the  Son  of 
God,  in  the  abiding  presence  of  His  Spirit  among 
men.  Who  would  not  now  strive  after  the  Eternal, 
the  Divine? 

§  7.  The  hour  came  when  Christianity,  no  longer  Estabiish- 
an  oppressed  or  tolerated  faith,  was  seated  on  the  Chris- 
throne  of  the  Csesars.2  Under  Constantine  it  passed  tianity‘ 
from  being  a  set  of  beliefs  into  an  institution  ;  from 
a  religion  into  a  church,  with  revenues,  organiza¬ 
tion,  an  independent  machinery  of  its  own.  As  a 
moral  or  spiritual  influence  only,  Christianity,  it 
may  well  he,  could  not  have  survived  the  conflict 
with  barbarism.  The  doctrines  believed  are  indeed 
the  true  core  of  a  religion ;  yet  there  may  be  times 


1  Compare  Neander  ( Memorials  of  Christian  Life ,  pp.  56,  57,  ed. 
Bohn).  Thus  Ep.  ad  Diogn.,  c.  x.  ncos  dyanr/areis  tov  ovtcos  Tvpoaycnrr)- 
aavra  ae ;  dyanrjaas  de,  pipt]Trjs  ear]  avrov  rr/s  xPr](XT^T1lTOS‘ 

2  Christianity  was  first  tojerated  by  Gallienus,  a.d.  261.  (Euseb., 
VII.  xiii.)  Under  Constantine  Paganism  became  the  tolerated,  Chris¬ 
tianity  the  favoured  religion.  (Gieseler,  I.  304.)  The  word  “  Paganism  ” 
first  occurs  in  a  law  of  Valentinian,  a.d.  368.  Theodosius  suppressed 
Paganism  (a.d.  381),  which  now  wrote  its  apologies  by  the  pen  of 
Libanius.  Lastly,  the  schools  of  heathen  philosophy  were  closed  at 
Athens  by  Justinian.  See,  however,  Gieseler,  I.  323. 


2  y8 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


when  it  is  the  organism  which  preserves  the  vitality, 
its  effects.  How  did  the  Church  of  Christ  bear  this  test  ?  Can 
we  read  in  its  after-fortunes  the  same  traces  of  a 
Divine  origin  and  of  a  Divine  Presence  ?  When  we 
look  on  the  marred  visage  of  a  divided  and  dis¬ 
membered  empire  ;  on  the  warrings  of  contending 
sects ;  on  the  victories  of  a  rival  yet  apostate  faith  ; 
on  the  social  miseries  and  general  immorality  of  the 
times,  amid  which  “  the  old  order  changing  ”  slowly 
passed  away ;  can  we  still  see  in  the  Religion  of 
Christ  the  hold  upon  the  hearts  and  consciences  of 
men,  the  moral  life  and  inward  working,  which  are 

cTins  ^ie  Sea^  heavenb7’  mission  ? 1  Why,  it  has  been 
tianity  did  sometimes  asked,  did  not  Christianity,  at  a  time 

not  save  .  ^ 

the  empire,  when  its  power  seemed  at  the  greatest  and  as  yet 
unimpaired,  save  the  Empire  ? 2  For  our  unworthi¬ 
ness,  answered  Salvian  ;3  from  its  own  overweight 


1  For  the  opposite  view,  see  Zeller,  Antiquite  et  Moyen-Age ,  p.  205. 

2  Compare  Montalembert,  Monks  of  the  West,  I.  256,  E.  T.  Guziot, 
Civ.  en  Fr .,  Lee.  nme,  points  out  that  Christian  society  is  only  deve¬ 
loped  after  the  invasion  of  the  barbarians,  and  belongs  to  modern 
history.  M.  Littre  gives  a  different  reply ;  viz.  that  Christianity  was 
at  first  a  spiritual,  and  not  yet  a  temporal  power.  Mr.  Lecky,  H.  E.  M., 
II.  151,  finds  an  explanation  in  the  fatal  indifference  of  Christians  to 
“  the  throes  of  their  expiring  country.”  He  quotes  the  striking  words 
of  Chateaubriand  :  “  Orose  et  Augustin  etoient  plus  occupes  du  schisme 
de  Pelage  que  de  la  desolation  de  l’Afrique  et  des  Gaules.”  This  view 
certainly  attributes  much  to  the  power  of  Christianity. 

3  See  De  Qubern.  Dei ,  III.  i.  ix. ;  IV.  v.  vii.  Taking  the  Gospel 
precepts  he  draws  a  sad  but  overstrained  picture  of  Christian  declension, 
adding  :  “  Quid  enim  dignius  aut  quid  justius  ?  Non  audivimus,  non 
audimur :  non  respeximus,  non  respicimur.”  Caesarius  Arelat.  takes  the 
same  view  in  his  Homilies.  From  these  rhetorical  accounts  we  may 
still  infer  the  general  corruption  of  the  times,  and  perceive  how  fatally, 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


279 


of  sins,  answered  Augustine  and  Orosius.  There 
was  reason  in  both  replies.  No  doubt,  the  flame  of 
Christian  enthusiasm  both  rose  and  fell  ;  it  had  its 
seasons  of  declension  and  revival.  But  the  Empire 
itself  was  the  beginning .  of  the  end  of  Roman 
civilization,  which  was  properly  founded  on  the 
virtues  of  the  Republic.  It  was  impotent  of  per¬ 
manent  revivification.  Under  Theodosius,  Justi¬ 
nian,  and  even  Heraclius,  it  showed  an  appearance 
of  concentration  and  force  which  had  no  true  basis 
of  reality.  It  offered  no  new  conditions  of  social 
and  political  development ;  no  enduring  institutions 
of  liberty  or  usefulness.  The  Municipal  system,  whatk 
with  its  rules  of  freedom ;  the  Imperial  ideas  of 
majesty,  order,  and  subordination,  were,  indeed, 
legacies  to  an  after-time.  But  it  was  the  Church 
of  Christ  which  entered  on  and  took  up  the  inheri¬ 
tance.  Meanwhile  the  leaven  of  Christian  doctrines 
was  working  after  its  proper  kind.  From  the  in¬ 
dividual  outwards  to  the  race,  through  single 
personal  influences,  the  restoration  of  human  nature 
was  progressing.  Following,  we  may  well  believe, 
a  Divine  guidance  as  the  enforcement  of  a  Divine 

both  in  morals  and  in  other  respects,  Paganism  had  reacted  on  Chris¬ 
tianity.  Con) pare  Schmidt,  Essai,  II 1.  c.  vi.  The  conditions  of  its  well¬ 
being  thus  vitiated,  it  was  only  by  the  infusion  ot  a  healthier  stock  in 
the  rude  virtues  of  the  Teutonic  tribes  that  it  was  enabled  to  put  out  its 
native  force.  It  is  interesting  to  observe  that  Africa,  destined  to  lose 
for  solono;  the  light  of  Christianity,  is  described  by  Salvian  as  the  foulest 
of  all  the  Homan  provinces  (VII.,  xiii.-xv.).  Its  vices,  he  says,  had  bred 
a  second  nature  in  its  inhabitants. 


28o 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


survived. ifc  and  as  a  moral  power  among  men,  it  made  to 
itself  a  spiritual,  not  a  temporal,  kingdom,  and  thus 
survived  the  collision  of  the  Empire  with  Barbarism. 
Though  powerless  to  avert  the  shock,  it  had  in  a 
thebnuckus  manner  Prepared  for  its  arrival.  In  the  free  insti- 
regenera-  ^u^ons  °f  Church,  based  on  the  spiritual  liberty 
ti°n ,  of  man,  there  existed  a  nucleus  of  social  regenera¬ 
tion,  destined  to  work  out,  on  favourable  soil,  a  new 
civilization.1  Its  Councils  and  Synods,  provincial, 
national,  and  general,  offered  a  standing  example 
of  free  assemblies,  so  congenial  to  the  Teutonic 
temper.  Its  election  of  Bishops  and  clergy,2  as  later 
of  Abbots  and  Popes,  recognized,  at  first  substan¬ 
tially,  the  claims  of  merit.  Indeed,  the  Church  has 
always  recruited  herself  from  all  ranks,  and  thus 
avoided  the  stagnation  incident  to  hereditary  castes.3 

ideas, W  Coming  forward  as  a  source  of  new  ideas,  Chris¬ 

tianity  bad,  at  the  outset,  no  fear  of  progress, 
intellect,  or  Science.  It  re-invigorated  Art  by 
endowing  it  with  new  motives  ;4  it  encouraged  in¬ 
dustry  ;  it  worked  with  the  influences  which  were 


1  See  Guizot  Civ.  en  Fr, I.  339,  E.  T.  Writers  on  this  period  of 
histoiy  will  perhaps  always  remain  divided  as  to  the  proportion  of  effect 
due  to  Koman  civilization,  to  German  independence,  and  to  Christian 
influence.  The  fact  of  the  latter  agency  is  all  that  is  here  maintained. 

,  GmZOt’  ,®’>  L,  331*  Gieseler>  I.  418.  The  Bishop  was  chosen 
eTuaKoncov  ctvpo8co  a>  kX^km,  alrijcrei  Xaw.  The  person  elected 

ly  the  clergy  was  accepted  by  the  people  crying  out  "Mios  bene 

meritus  ;  or  dm^oy.— See  Bingham,  IV.  ii.  4,  5,  and  XVII.  v.  3  with 
the  authorities. 

3  Guizot,  Civ.  en  Fur.,  I.  93. 

Comp.  Ozanam,  Civil.  Chretienne  au  Vn'«  Steele,  I.  c.  i.  Sec  also 
M.  Little,  Les  Sarbares  et  U  Moyen-Aye.  Introduction. 


•  4 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


281 


changing  slavery  into  serfdom,  and  serfdom  into 
free  tenures ;  and  welcomed,  in  the  new  races  which 
overran  the  Empire,  the  virtues  of  a  rude  but  un¬ 
corrupted  Barbarism.1  Thus  it  furnished  its  con-  "ect“saJni 
querors  with  the  elements  requisite  to  their  social 
development.  In  the  collapse  of  the  Empire, banans* 
Christianity  was  left  single-handed  to  contend  with 
the  intrusion  of  new  forces,  and  to  undertake  the 
work  of  reconstruction.  On  through  the  Middle 
Ages  (properly  so  called)  intervening  between  the 
decay  of  ancient  civilization  and  the  revival  of  a 
new  and  modern  culture  under  the  influences  of 
classical  philosophy  and  literature,  Christianity,  as 
an  intellectual  as  well  as  a  moral  power,  wrought 
alone.2  The  progress  made  in  physical  discoveries  ;  Vast  con- 

1  0  .  .  sequences 

in  art,  however  rudimentary,  culminating,  notwith-  due  to 

Christian 

standing,  in  the  suhlimest  ideals ;  in  language  and  influence 

o  ’  jn  these 

mental  discussion ; 3  was  the  fruit  of  Christian  influ-  times. 

1  Compare  Salvian,  u.  s.,  IV.  xiii.,  VII.  vi.  “Inter  pudicos  barbaros 
impudici  sumus :  plus  adhuc  dico ;  offenduntur  barbari  ipsi  impurita- 
tibus  nostris.”  He  excepts  among  Christians  from  his  rebuke  the 
religiosi. 

2  “  All  the  civil  elements  of  modern  society  were  either  in  decay  or 
infancy.  The  Church  alone  was  at  the  same  time  young  and  constituted : 
it  alone  had  acquired  a  definite  form,  and  preserved  all  the  vigour  of 
early  age :  it  alone  possessed  at  once  movement  and  order,  energy,  and 
regularity ;  that  is  to  say,  the  two  great  means  of  influence.” — Guizot, 

Civ.  en  Fur.,  I.  85.  Christianity,  it  must  be  remembered,  preceded  the 
political  re-organization  consequent  on  the  fall  of  the  Empire,  and  may 
therefore  be  regarded  as  the  more  powerful  and  necessary  element. 

3  See  M.  Guizot’s  most  interesting  comparison  of  the  civil  and  the 
Christian  literature  in  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries.  Civ.  en  Fr .,  Vol.  I. 

Lee.  IV.  “  Intellectual  development,”  he  most  truly  observes,  “  the 
labour  of  mind  to  obtain  truth,  will  stop  unless  placed  in  the  train  and 


282 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


ence  on  the  rough  material  of  the  Barbaric  stock.  In 
this  pei  iod  were  sown  the  germs  of  all  future  social 
advance.  The  ubiquity  and  variety  of  Christian 
influence  in  the  period  we  are  rapidly  reviewing, 
from  the  fifth  to  the  fourteenth  centuries,  are  every¬ 
where  apparent.  It  will  be  sufficient  (and  in  this 
Lecture  only  in  part  practicable)  to  mark  some 

Uie  present  |nstances  of  it ;  to  briefly  assign  to  other  sources  of 
inquiry,  influence  their  due  share  in  the  work  of  European 

civilization ;  and  lastly,  to  notice  some  results  and 
circumstances  which  have  been  alleged  to  make 
against  Clnistianity  as  a  successful  operative  ele¬ 
ment  at  this  period  in  the  advance  of  mankind. 
Chris-S°f  §  “Never,  says  M.  Guizot,  “has  any  other 
fromthe  SOciety  made  such  efforts  to  influence  the  surround- 

tenNn-  '"S  WOrld’  and  to  stamP  there°n  its  own  likeness 
tury.  as  were  made  by  the  Christian  Church  between  the 

fifth  and  tenth  centuries.”1  It  was  not,  be  it  re- 

beneath  the  shield  of  some  one  of  the  actual,  immediate,  powerful  in¬ 
terests  of  humanity.  .  .  .  The  Christian  religion  furnished  them  with 
the  means  :  by  uniting  with  it  philosophy  and  literature  escaped  the 
rum  which  menaced  them.”  Thus  the  spiritual  vigour  of  Christianity 

worked  by  means  of  education,  and  enlisted  in  its  cause  the  highest 
minds  of  the  time.  & 

■  M.  Sismondi,  Hist.  d.  Franc.,  II.  50:  “Lors  de  l’etablissement  du 
Ohnstiamsme  l<a  religion  avait  essentiellement  consiste  dans  l’enseio-ne- 
ment  moral :  elle  avait  excerce  les  coears  et  les  ames  par  la  recherche  de 
ce  qui  etait  vraiment  beau,  vraiment  honndte.  Au  cinquidme  sidcle  on 
layait  surtout  attachee  a  l’orthodoxie,  au  septidme  on  l’avait  reduite  a 
labienfaisance  envers  les  convents.”  This  summary  does  not  allow 
sufhcieDtly  for  the  missionary  labours  of  this  period.  “  The  triumrili  ” 
says  Dean  Merivale,  “  of  the  Church  over  her  Northern  conquerors  was 
the  greatest,  I  suppose,  of  all  her  triumphs,  the  issue  least  to  be  ex¬ 
pected  beforehand,  most  to  be  admired  in  the  retrospect,  of  any.” 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


283 


membered,  till  after  the  invasion  of  the  Barbarians 
that  a  career  was  opened  to  the  Church  of  influ¬ 
encing  civil  society.  All  institutions  hitherto 
had  been  laid  in  Paganism.  The  government 
and  administration  represented  only  the  Imperial 
system.  Slowly,  as  the  Empire  fell  back  in  every 
direction  on  Rome  and  Constantinople,  these  gave 
way.  The  mass  of  the  provincial  population  its  new 

J  means  of 

entered  the  Christian  society.  New  interests  and  influence, 
new  influence  opened  before  the  Bishops  and 
clergy.1  Literature,  education,  the  exercise  of  the 
learned  professions,  fell  into  Christian  hands.  As 
a  moral  instrument  to  govern  the  lives  of  men, 
endowed  with  an  organization  fitted  by  its  fixedness 
yet  pliancy  for  wide-reaching  and  varied  applica¬ 
tion,  Christianity  at  the  period  of  the  invasion  ot 
the  Barbarians  stood  forth  in  all  its  power,  ready 
for  the  work  which  lay  before  it.  By  a  natural 
transition  the  Bishops  resident  in  the  cities  and 
centres  of  population,  the  last  protectors  of  all  that 
remained  of  Roman  society  and  Roman  civilization, 
became  the  counsellors  of  the  invading  leaders ;  the 
equals  of  counts  and  nobles  ;  enjoining  humanity 
towards  the  vanquished,  acting  as  mediators  in 

1  The  clergy  were  taken  chiefly  from  the  subjugated  people  who  thus 
acquired  a  powerful  influence  over  their  conquerors.  See  Canon  Kobert- 
son  (C.  H .,  I.  555).  They  became  the  “  defensores  civitatis,”  or  standing 
advocates  of  the  rights  of  the  provincials.  On  the  effect  of  the  system 
of  Christianity  within  the  Empire  on  the  Germans,  see  Merivale  (Lec££., 
p.  102)  :  “  Home  abandoned  by  her  Caesars  and  her  legions  vras  left  to 
the  counsel  and  protection  of  her  Bishop  and  his  priest,”  &c; 


284 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


the  reconstruction  of  social  relations  between  two 
hostile  races,  and  holding  out  the  model  of  Imperial 
legislation.1  Their  position  soon  ensured  territorial 
influence2  and  hierarchical  organization  ;  a  valuable 
means  of  permanence  in  an  age  when  moral  con¬ 
sideration  only  or  religious  reverence  might  have 
proved  short-lived.  From  this  era,  the  era  of 
Gregory  the  Great,  may  be  dated  the  final  Chris¬ 
tianization  of  Europe  in  its  full  possession  of  society 
legislation.  and  of  the  human  mind.  The  religion  and  laws 
ot  all  nations  are  more  or  less  closely  connected : 
and  the  Barbaric  Codes  were  framed  for  the  most 
part  after  their  settlement  within  the  Empire  and 
their  submission  to  Christian  teaching.  The  rise 
then,  of  the  Church  of  Christ  on  the  ruins  of  the’ 
Imperial  system ;  its  assimilation  of  the  new  con¬ 
ditions  under  which  it  was  placed ;  forming  a  bond 
of  union  among  the  scattered  fragments  of  the 
Empire  ;3  the  facility  with  which  it  applied  itself 
to  the  social  regeneration  of  the  time,  constitute 
a  palmary  example  of  the  power  and  character  of 
its  111  uence,  of  its  capacity  for  permanence  and 


andd °f  ‘lle  P°sition  * 
the  two  hostile  rtSs  in  the  n\  801' .  “Tluls  tlle  ^rgy  stood  between 
-  — 

Not  indeed  to  the  secular  clergy  at  large. 

JDean  Milman,  Lat  Chr  vt  on?  i 
m  •  .  •  G/tr.,  \  1.  20/,  makes  some  just  observations  on 

5S5S: — -  ■«  —s  srss 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


285 


advance.  It  is  true  that  in  secular  matters,  such  as  its  tem- 

.  , .  .  poral  sub¬ 

tile  confirmation  of  Bishops  in  their  temporalities,  ordination, 

(sometimes  even  in  their  election),  the  Church  was 
subordinated  to  the  royal  mandates.  But  on  the 
side  of  dogmatic  and  spiritual  authority  she  re¬ 
mained  free,  supreme  :  and  thus  established  herself 
in  the  most  fertile  and  perennial  source  of  influence,  but  spiri- 

A  #  ...  tual  liberty. 

How  large  a  contrast  to  the  decline  of  ecclesiastical 
importance  in  the  Eastern  Empire!  There  from  Contrast  in 
the  despotic  authority  of  the  Emperors  ;x  their  tra-  between 
ditional  policy  of  reducing  the  Bishops  to  depend-  and  Latin 

•  Chris- 

ence  ;  their  custom  of  interference  not  only  with  tianity. 
the  government  and  administration,  but  even  with 
the  creeds  of  the  Church  by  decrees  and  edicts  of 
doctrine ;  and  also  from  the  fact  of  the  laity  taking 
part  in  matters  of  theology,  and  converting  them 
into  instruments  of  policy  ;  the  relations  of  the 
ecclesiastical  to  the  civil  power  were  impaired  : 
the  influence  of  the  clergy  in  spiritual  affairs  dimi¬ 
nished  ;  and  the  authority  of  the  Christian  doctrine, 
both  among  the  Barbarian  immigrants  and  within 
the  bosom  of  the  Empire,  was  vitally  affected.  Its 
consequences  were  witnessed  alike  in  the  sub- 


1  See  Milman,  L.  Chr .,  I.  331.  “  Theodosius  and  Gratian  define  or 

ratify  the  definition  of  doctrines,  declare  and  condemn  heretics.  Jus¬ 
tinian  is  a  kind  of  Caliph  of  Christianity,”  &c.  Comp.  Gieseler,  I.  341 , 
421 ;  II.  59,  119,  §  116.  The  words  of  Constantine  (ap.  Euseb.,  Vit. 
Const.,  IV.  xxiv.)  are  well  known.  See  Robertson,  C.  H.,  I.  296,  298 ; 
III.  137.  The  Emperor  Manuel  took  part,  as  an  author,  in  theological 
controversy.  Hence  Iconoclasm,  which  was  the  Reformation  of  the 
Eastern  Church,  was  abortive. 


286 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


servience  of  Bishops  and  clergy,  during  the  rival 
struggles  of  Constantinople  and  Alexandria,  and 
in  the  Iconoclastic  controversies,  as  also  in  the 
fanaticism  of  the  monks  of  the  East,  alternately 
encouraged  or  compelled  by  court  influence, 
effectsof  §9-  There  is  ground,  then,  for  asserting  the 
gion  amid  Presence  during  these  centuries  of  high  spiritual 
ruptiom°r~  ldeas>  notwithstanding  the  corruption  and  degene¬ 
racy  of  the  times :  and  that  the  influence  of  these 
ideas  produced  effects  which,  with  whatever  ad¬ 
mixture,  are  characteristic  of  the  Religion  of  Jesus 
Christ.  One  by  one  the  Barbarian  Tribes,  as  they 
mingled  with  the  Greek  or  Latin  populations  of  the 
Empire,  were  silently  subdued.1  Later,  indeed,  in 
the  case  of  the  Franks,  the  compulsion  of  stern 
and  even  sanguinary  legislation  was  brought  to 
bear  (partly  for  political  objects)  in  aid  of  con¬ 
version.2  Heathenism,  it  might  thus  be  said, 

1  Allusion  is  here  made  more  particularly  to  the  Moeso-Goths,  or,  as 
known  later,  Ostro  and  Visigoths,  within  the  Empire ;  not  to  the  Gothi 
minores,  as  they  were  called,  won  over  to  the  faith  by  Ulphilas,  “  que 
les  Grecs  appelerent  le  Moise  de  son  temps.”  Ozanam,  Etudes,  II.  22. 

“  No  record  whatever,”  says  Milman,  “  not  even  a  legend,  remains  of 
the  manner  in  which  the  two  great  branches  of  the  Gothic  race,  the 
Visigoths  in  France,  the  Ostrogoths  in  Pannonia,  and  the  Suevians  in 
Spain,  the  Gepidas,  the  Vandals,  the  mingled  hosts  which  formed  the 
army  of  Odoacer,  the  first  king  of  Italy,  and  at  length  the  fierce  Lom¬ 
bards,  were  converted  to  Christianity.”— Lat.  Chr.,  I.  255.  Niebuhr 
remarks  that  the  proportion  of  Christians  among  the  Goths  was  much 
greater  than  among  the  populations  they  invaded.  Vortrage ,  III.  316. 
See  Itobertson,  C.  IT.,  I.  489.  From  Sozomen,  E.  E.,  II.  vi.,  it  would 

appear  that  Christianity 'was  first  spread  by  Roman  captives  in  the 
wars  of  the  third  century. 

“  Germany,”  says  M.  Littre,  with  some  scorn,  “  disputed  its  con- 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


287 


waned  before  it,  as  Christianity  in  its  turn  within  Examples 

"  of  mvolun- 

the  realm  of  Islamism.  But  the  parallel  suggested  tary  con- 

•  version. 

would  be  found  inexact.  For  the  Faith  of  Christ, 
though  beaten  down,  survived  in  many  quarters 
even  under  the  scourge  of  Mahommedanism  ;l  while 
Paganism  in  the  far  North  of  Europe  altogether, 
however  slowly,  disappeared.  From  first  to  last  in 
the  work  of  the  conversion  of  Europe  it  is  plain  to 
see  that  it  was  an  infelt  sense  of  the  truth  and  of 
the  blessings  of  Christ’s  Religion,  which  captivated 
and  retained  the  homage  of  the  Barbarian  tribes : 
the  combination  of  its  deeper  mysteries  with  the 
purity  of  its  moral  code.  The  Barbarians  were  True  in- 

fluenccs 

open  to  the  influence  neither  of  art  nor  of  know-  of  chris- 
ledge.  There  remained  only  the  logic  of  the  heart. tiamty 
Here  the  satisfaction  offered  by  the  Faith  of  Christ 
'to  the  fears  and  hopes  of  our  nature  with  its  yearning 
after  the  Unseen  and  Divine  ;  here  too  the  intrinsic 
and  exquisite  goodness  of  its  teaching,  wrought  in  the 
case  of  the  German  race  on  congenial  soil.2  Apart 


version  for  four  centuries,  and  then  yielded  to  the  sword  of  Charle¬ 
magne.” — Les  Barbares ,  p.  18.  Mr.  Freeman,  Norman  Conquest , 
I.  29,  points  out  that  in  England  Christianity  made  its  way  without 
violence  and  coercion.  He  quotes  Bede,  E.  H .,  i.  25. 

1  As,  e.  g.,  in  Armenia.  In  Persia,  Magism,  which  had  resisted  the 
appeal  of  Christianity,  yielded  to  the  scimitar  of  Mahomet. 

2  Compare  Tacitus  ( Germ .,  c.  ix.).  “  Casterum  non  cohibere  parieti- 

bus  Deos,  neque  in  ullam  humani  orisspeciem  adsimilare  ex  magnitu- 
dine  coelestium  arbitrantur :  Deorumque  nominibus  appellant  secretum 
illud  quod  sola  reverentia  vident.”  It  has  been  remarked  by  Grimm 
( D .  M.,  pp.  9-11)  that  certain  religious  forms  and  words  are  common  to 
all  the  races  of  Teutonic  descent.  See  Milman,  I.  242.  Similarly  the 
readiness  of  the  language  to  frame  words  for  the  new  doctrinal  ideas  of 


288 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


from  any  legendary  pretensions  to  miraculous  power, 

the  charac-  were  permanent  credentials  to  reception. 

barbaric6  ^mic^  and  suffering  of  an  age  of  violence, 

tribes.  the  piety  of  the  Christian  believer  was  the  more 

conspicuous,  and  took,  it  may  well  be,  a  more 
vehement  and  impassioned  character  “  It  was  the 
time/’  it  has  been  finely  said,1  “  for  great  Chris¬ 
tian  virtues  as  well  as  for  more  profound  Christian 
consolations :  virtues  in  some  points  strikingly 
congenial  to  barbaric  minds,  as  giving  a  sublime 
patience  and  serenity  in  suffering,  a  calm  con¬ 
tempt  of  death.  The  Pagan  admired  the  martyr 
whom  in  wantonness  he  slew,  when  that  martyr 
showed  true  Christian  tranquillity  in  his  agony. 
There  was  no  danger  which  the  better  Bishops 
and  clergy  would  not  encounter  for  their  flocks. 
They  would  venture  to  confront  unarmed  the  fierce 
warrior.  All  the  treasures  of  the  unplundered 
Churches  were  willingly  surrendered  for  the 


Christianity  points  in  the  same  direction.  This  topic  is  pursued  by  the 
same  author  (VI.  347).  The  same  remark  had  been  previously  made 
by  Guericke  (Kirch engesch.,  sub  init.).  On  the  whole  subject,  see  Guizot, 
Civ.  en  Fr.,  Lee.  VII.  Ozanam,  Etudes  Germaniques ,  I.  c.  iii.  Krafft, 
Aw f tinge  der  Christlichen  Kirclie  lei  den  Germanischen  Volkern,  and 
Meiivale,  Lectt .,  pp.  88, 130.  He  remarks  on  the  connection  between  the 
Teutonic  mythology  and  the  teachings  of  Christianity,  for  which  it 
formed  a  preparation. 

, 1  Milman>  Latin  Christianity ,  I.  250.  “  Le  Christianisme  fut  anime 
d  un  ardent  proselytisme.  Le  proselytisme  triompha :  les  barbares 
fluent  \aincus  et  pris :  s’ils  avaient  ete  inconvertibles,  nul  ne  saurait 
dire  ce  qui  serait  advenu  des  destinies  de  l’Occident.”— Littre,  u.  s.  In  a 
single  generation  from  their  conversion  the  Normans  became  remarkable 
for  their  devotion.  See  Hallam,  M.  A.,  I.  135. 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


289 


redemption  of  captives.  Even  the  austerities  prac¬ 
tised  by  some  of  the  clergy,  and  by  those  who 
had  commenced  the  monastic  life,  would  arrest  the 
attention,  and  enthral  the  admiration  of  Barbarians, 
to  whom  self-command,  endurance,  strength  of 
will,  would  appear  kindred  and  noble  qualities.” 

Nor  must  the  fact  of  an  elaborate  ritual,1  con-  Symboii- 
sidered  as  a  means  01  impressing  by  symbolic  ter  of  the 
forms,  or  words,  the  deep-seated  truths  of  the  churc°h.the 
Christian  Faith  on  an  unlettered  people,  be  omitted 
from  a  review  of  the  spiritual  influences  exercised 
at  this  period  by  Christianity.  If  not  religion  in 
the  highest  sense,  such  modes  of  representation 
were  the  preparation  for  it. 

§  10.  The  privilege  of  asylum  or  sanctuary,  Example 
claimed  by  the  Christian  Church  in  the  Middle  tian  i  11- 
AgeS,  and  recognized  accordingly  in  most  Barbaric  fheprivl- 
Codes,  though  familiar  in  the  history  of  Greece,2  sanctuary. 

•  1  “  Christianity  offered  itself,  and  was  accepted  by  the  German  tribes 
as  a  law  and  as  a  discipline,  as  an  ineffable,  incomprehensible  mystery 
. Ritual  observance  is  a  taming,  humiliating  process :  it  is  sub¬ 
mission  to  law :  it  is  the  acknowledgment  of  spiritual  inferiority  :  it 
implies  self-subjection,  self-conquest,  self-sacrifice.  It  is  not  religion  in 
its  highest  sense,  but  it  is  the  preparation  for  it.”  Ritter  ( Christliche 
Philos .,  I.  40),  ap.  Milman,  I.  376.  Dorner  (Hist.  Protest.  Th .,  I.  17) 
makes  the  same  remark  as  to  canonical  law.  An  all-embracin°- 
spiritual  kingdom  was  thus  opposed  to  physical  force  and  warlike 
ambition. 

2  C.  F.  Hermann  (Gr.  Antiq .,  II.  p.  44)  remarks  that  this  privilege 
belonged  mainly  to  the  oldest  Temples ;  and  hence  infers  that  it  was 
a  relic  of  the  restraint  imposed  by  religion  in  the  earliest  and  most 
savage  periods.  Similarly  the  Hebrew  Cities  of  Refuge  are  connected 
with  the  primeval  practices  of  “  blood-money,”  and  a  “  revenger  of 
blood.” 

U 


290 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


was  confined  by  Roman  legislation  to  the  protec¬ 
tion  of  slaves.1  It  may  be  cited  and  selected  as  an 
example  of  the  intrinsic  influence  asserted  by 
Christianity  over  the  most  savage  of  its  converts. 
While  it  appealed  to  the  innate  reverence2  for  holy 
places  congenial  to  the  Teutonic  mind,  it  exercised 
a  restraint  on  the  most  violent  and  fatal  passions, 
based  on  a  strictly  spiritual  principle.  No  crime, 
it  taught,  is  so  heavy  that  it  may  not  be  pardoned 
by  the  individual  man  out  of  the  love  and  fear  of 
Not  at  first  God  an(j  jn  imitation  of  His  mercy.3  Nor  at  first 

abused.  J 

was  it  abused,  when  sufficiently  controlled  by  the 
higher  law  of  the  community.  It  was  in  the  same 
manner  that  the  Papacy  itself,4  despite  the  vices, 

1  See  Gaius,  i.  53.  Digest,  48,  Tit.  19,  s.  28,  §  7.  Gibbon  (c.  xx.) 
speaks  roughly  of  “  the  ancient  privilege  of  sanctuary  as  transferred  to 
the  Christian  Temples.”  But  the  laws  of  Charlemagne,  as  also  of  the 
Anglo-Saxons,  required  the  Church  to  surrender  persons  convicted  of 
capital  crimes.  Cf.  Robertson  ((7.  E .,  II.  228). 

2  “  How  must  this  right,”  says  Hallam,  “  have  enhanced  the  venera¬ 
tion  for  religious  institutions !  How  gladly  must  the  victims  of  in¬ 
ternal  warfare  have  turned  their  eyes  from  the  baronial  castle,  the 
dread  and  scourge  of  the  neighbourhood,  to  those  venerable  walls, 
within  which  not  even  the  clamour  of  arms  could  be  heard  to  disturb 
the  chant  of  holy  men  and  the  sacred  service  of  the  altar !  The  pro¬ 
tection  of  the  sanctuary  was  never  withheld.” — Middle  Ages,  III.  302. 
12th  edit. 

3  Being  thus  reminded  that 

All  the  souls  that  were,  were  forfeit  once, 

And  He  that  might  the  Vantage  best  have  took 
Found  out  the  remedy. 

4  “  No  accessory  or  fortuitous  aids  could  have  raised  the  Papacy  to 
its  commanding  height,  had  it  not  possessed  more  sublime  and  more 
lawful  claims  to  the  reverence  of  mankind.  It  was  still  an  assertion 
of  eternal  principles  of  justice,  righteousness,  and  humanity.  However 
it  might  trample  on  all  justice,  sacrifice  righteousness  to  its  own 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


291 


ambition,  and  greed  of  those  who  sat  in  St.  Peter’s 
seat,  fulfilled,  out  of  the  very  arrogance  of  its  pre¬ 
tensions,  a  function  of  undoubted  spiritual  benefit 
in  those  rude  and  turbulent  ages.  It  was  a  tribu¬ 
nal  of  appeal  for  the  helpless,  a  refuge  from  over¬ 
whelming  tyranny,  as  the  impersonation  of  the 
power  of  the  Gospel,  before  which  the  crowned 
monarch  and  the  lawless  baron  trembled  and  gave 
way.1  “  Speaking  God’s  testimonies  even  before 
kings  it  was  not  ashamed.”  And  the  same  reflec¬ 
tion  is  suggested  when  there  is  taken  into  account 
the  vast  system  of  spiritual  authority  exercised 
in  the  practice  of  confession,  absolution,  excommu¬ 
nication,  and  interdict,  in  the  recognition  of  the 


Analogy 
of  appeals 
to  the 
papacy. 


Of  the 
system  of 
peniten- 
tials,  ex- 
communi¬ 
cation,  &c. 


duty  of  penance,2  in  the  existence  and  usage  of  Peni- 
tentials  as  a  part  of  Christian  law.  However  rude, 
humiliating,  harsh  the  discipline  enjoined,  however 
tending  to  corrupt  itself  through  pecuniary  substi- 


interests,  plunge  Europe  in  desolating  wars,  perpetuate  strife  in  states, 
set  sons  in  arms  against  their  fathers,  fathers  against  sons :  it  was  still 
proclaiming  a  higher  ultimate  end.  It  was  something  that  there  was 
a  tribunal  of  appeal,  before  which  the  lawless  aristocracy  trembled. 

There  was  a  perpetual  provocation,  as  it  were,  to  the  Gospel,”  &c. _ 

Milman,  L.  Chr.,  III.  441. 

1  “  The  medieval  popes  almost  always  belonged  to  a  far  higher  grade 
of  civilization  than  their  opponents.  Whatever  may  have  been  their 
faults,  they  represented  the  cause  of  moral  restraint,  of  intelligence,  and 

of  humanity,  in  an  age  of  physical  force,  ignorance,  and  barbarity.” _ 

Lecky,  II.  Put.,  II.  155.  Christianity,  it  must  be  remembered,  must  be 
judged  by  the  evils  it  has  prevented  as  well  as  by  its  positive  benefits. 

On  the  change  from  public  to  private  confession  and  penance,  with 
its  consequences,  see  Gieseler,  II.  pp.  68-70,  and  p.  318.  In  the 
Western  Church  this  important  difference  was  introduced  by  Leo  the 
Great.  Compare  Hooker,  E.  P.,  VI.  iv. 

u  2 


292 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VI. 


tution ;  it,  yet  exhibited  the  power  and  quality  of  a 
Religion  which  would  not  be  defied  or  evaded,  to 
restrain,  out  of  no  worldly  considerations,  the  licen¬ 
tiousness,  inhumanity,  and  lawlessness  of  men. 
What  no  human  law  could  effect,  it  secured  by 
spiritual  constraint  and  the  “  terrors  of  the  Lord.” 
Restraint  Though  unsafely  lodged  in  the  hands  of  a  fallible 
by  spiritual  priesthood,  in  a  low  condition  of  culture,  and  des- 

lnrluence.  1  1 

tilled  later  to  corruption  from  their  corporate  and 

% 

individual  covetousness,  it  still  performed  its  part; 
rescuing  society  from  moral  anarchy,  and  bringing 
home  to  the  ignorant  and  wanton  the  direct  admi¬ 
nistration  of  God.  Where  conscience,  as  a  re¬ 
straint,  would  have  been  powerless,  its  authority  in 
t?onof"  ^le  Person  the  priest  was  obeyed.  The  particu- 
temporai  }ar  influences  of  medieval  Christianity  hitherto 

and  spiri¬ 
tual  power  adduced  are  instances  of  its  general  tendency  to 

detach  the  spiritual  from  the  temporal  power,  one 
of  its  greatest  benefits  to  mankind ;  and  to  operate 
within  the  just  limits  of  Religion,  the  hopes  and 
fears  of  a  future  life.  In  this  manner  the  authority 
of  conscience,  freedom  of  thought,  individual  inde¬ 
pendence  and  accountability,  were  preserved  in 
ways  unsuspected,  it  is  true,  by  the  champions 
themselves  of  ecclesiastical  privileges.1  Thus  the 

1  “  Lcs  societes,”  says  M.  Little  very  profoundly,  “  ne  sont  pas  commo 
un  individu  qui  en  une  extremity  peut  se  dire,  que  faire?  et  qui  dingo 
dcs  efforts  determines  vers  un  but  determine ;  mais  ellcs  ont  des  impul¬ 
sions  et  des  instincts  produits  par  les  forces  intrinseques  qu’elles  se 
sentent.” 


Lect.  VI.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY, 


293 


Inquisition  itself,  amid  all  its  iniquities,  by  holding  observabie 
the  civil  power  to  be  incapable  of  pronouncing  on  out  medie- 

1  val  Catlio- 

religious  belief,  actually  became  the  advocate  01  licism. 
toleration.  The  importance  of  this  element  in 
medieval  Catholicism  has  been  honourably  ad¬ 
mitted  by  some  who  in  other  respects  are  no  partial 
judges  of  the  working  of  Christian  institutions.1 
I  shall  cite  (though  not  in  the  present  Lecture)  but 
two  other  examples  of  the  true  character  and  in¬ 
tensity  of  the  influence  of  Christianity  during  this 
stage  of  European  progress,  which  will  conclude 
this  portion  of  our  subject.  Thus  far  we  have  Actual 
seen  the  services,  the  triumphs,  the  potency  of  our  of  Chris- 

.  .  ,  f,  ,  .  tianity  in 

holy  Ileligion  in  establishing  itself  upon  the  ruins  the  reeon- 
of  Paganism,  in  laying  the  foundations  of  our  of  society, 
modern  civilization.  We  have  seen  also  that  it 


was  destined  in  the  wisdom  of  an  overruling  Pro¬ 
vidence  to  survive  persecution  from  without,  inter¬ 
nal  heresy  and  division,  the  revivals  of  heathenism, 
and  the  flood  of  barbaric  invasion.  But  not  only 
did  it  survive  :  it  proved  itself  indispensable  to  the 
advance  of  mankind,  socially,  politically,  intellec-  . 
tually.  Under  its  shadow  learning  revived ;  sen-  No  reason 
timent  softened  and  became  refined ;  the  arts  ^Jung  its 
expanded,  knowledge  and  thought  progressed.2 


1  M.  Comte  and  Mr.  J.  S.  Mill,  both  indeed  after  M.  Guizot,  who  has 
irref ragably  established  this  fact.  See  Phil.  Pos.,  V.  229;  Mill’s  Dis¬ 
sert.,  1 1.  243. 


become 

changed. 


2  “  But  still,  it  will  be  asked,  would  not  all  this  result  of  Christianity 
have  been  just  the  same  without  the  peculiar  doctrines?” — Mozley, 


294 


THE  PERMANENCE ,  Nc.  [Lect.  VI. 


The  question  then  remains,  is  there  reason  to  hoid 
its  quality  to  be  changed — has  it  lost  its  virtue  ? 
Have  its  principles  proved  hollow  and  unsound  ? 
Has  it  wrought  its  work,  has  it  impressed  its  in¬ 
fluence  through  a  falsehood?  Such  as  we  have 
seen  it  to  be,  it  overcame  the  world  in  its  fairest 
and  most  highly  civilized  regions.  And  none  but 
this,  we  know  and  are  assured,  “  is  the  victory  that 
overcometh  the  world,  even  our  faith.” 

B.  L p.  190 ;  who  replies  that  besides  the  matter-of-fact  coincidence 
between  the  results  and  the  doctrine,  there  is  the  conviction  of  the 
agents  to  the  same  effect.  Would  a  moral  Deism  have  produced  the 
same  consequences  ?  Would  Christianity  deprived  of  its  revealed  ideas 
exhibit  the  same  fruits  ? 


LECTURE  VIE 


THE  PERMANENCE  OF  CHRISTIANITY  INFERRED 
FROM  THE  CHARACTER  OF  ITS  INFLUENCE. 


“  If  we  are  to  calculate  the  probable  extension  or  extinction  of  Christian 
opinions,  we  must  consult  the  evidence  of  facts  on  a  large  scale;  and 
especially  must  observe  what  manifestations  of  intrinsic  power  they 
have  given  on  certain  peculiar  and  critical  occasions.  This  is  the  only 
course  that  can  be  deemed  satisfactory,  or  that  is  conformed  to  the  pro¬ 
cedures  of  modern  science.” — I.  Taylok,  Nat.  Hist,  of  Entlms.,  p.  264. 


LECTURE  VII. 


“  Ye  are  the  salt  of  the  earth” — (Patt.  li,  13. 

Si.  T  T  may  seem  at  first  sight  unjust  to  cite  Monasti- 

3  R  J  0  cism,  hov 

Monasticism  as  a  specific  testimony  to  a  testi- 

A  o  mony  to 

the  power  and  character  of  Christian  doctrine,  the  influ- 

1  ...  ence  of 

when  its  prevalence  among  earlier  religions,  as  Chris- 
that  of  Buddha,  is  taken  into  account.1  No  doubt, 
sacrifices  have  been  made  by  other  faiths  to  the 
principle  of  Asceticism.  All  such  would  by  some 
thinkers  be  equally  and  unhesitatingly  condemned . 

1  Thus  M.  Littre  observes:  “Le  Christianisme,  quelques  tempera¬ 
ments  qu’on  y  ait  apportes,  est  une  religion  cssentiellement  asc6tiquc :  ct 
comme  l’ascetique  Buddhisme  il  avait  enfante  le  monachisme.” — Lcs 
Barbares,  p.  115.  Some  have  traced  the  origin  of  Christian  Mona- 
chism  to  the  Palestinian  Essenes,  represented  at  Alexandria  by  the 
Therapeutic ; "  some,  on  the  other  hand,  to  a  doctrine  of  the  Neo- 
Platonists. — Comp.  Gieselcr,  II.  i. ;  Neandcr,  I.  84  ;  Dollingcr,  Gentile 
and  Jew ,  II.  311-316.  Pliilo  {de  Vit.  Contempt.,  §  3)  recognized  the 
tendency  as  one  common  to  human  nature  under  certain  conditions. 
rroWaxov  pev  ovv  TijS  olKovfievrjS  tovto  to  yevos.  yap  dyaOov 

TeXeiov  ju. eracr^eiv  k a\  rrjv  'EXXdSa  k ai  tijv  fiapftapov.  This  principle, 
however,  to  povov  civ  at  7 rpos  Qeov,  is  a  different  one  from  the 
philosophic  ascetic  spirit  which  was  early  remarked  in  the  first 
Christians,  as  a  reaction  on  the  immorality  of  the  times.  Similarly  the 
doctrine  of  a  higher  perfection,  which  arose  out  of  the  asceticism  of  the 
monastic  life,  has  no  necessary  connection  with  its  first  principles. 

Comp.  De  Wette,  Gesch.  d.  Christl.  Sittenlehre,  I.  340.  Chrysostom  (a. 
oppugn.  Vit.  Mon.,  c.  iii.,  ap.  Robertson,  C.  11.,  I.  332)  well  says,  “  All 
men  ought  to  rise  to  the  same  height ;  and  that  which  ruins  the  whole 
world  is  that  we  imagine  a  greater  strictness  to  be  necessary  for  the 
monk  alone  ;  but  that  others  may  lead  careless  lives.” 


298 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VII. 


Others  might  be  inclined  to  place  them  on  an  equal 
footing’.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  not  unimpor¬ 
tant  that  the  Religion  of  Christ  should  not  in  its 
past  history  be  without  a  test  of  spiritual  convic¬ 
tion  and  personal  sacrifice  which  belongs  to  other 
faiths.  And  certainly  when  the  genius  of  Western 
ofnBu0d-y  Monasticism  is  contrasted  with  that  of  Oriental 
dhism.  Monachism  ;  and  this  again  with  the  futile  itera¬ 
tions,  external  rites,  and  debasing  humiliations  of 
the  followers  of  Grotama,1  the  faith  of  Christian 
Europe  will  not  be  found  to  suffer  by  the  compa¬ 
rison.  The  great  work  of  Monasticism  has  doubt- 

morai esed  ] ess  been  to  exhibit  a  high,  if  one-sided,  Christian 
defects,  ideal,  superior  to  surrounding  secular  influences,  and 

surpassing  the  conception  of  mere  moral  or  political 
institutions.  I  cannot  see  with  some  that  the  pre¬ 
sence  of  such  an  ideal  tends  to  reduce  the  average 
standard  of  religious  duty.  M.  Renan 2  has  not 
denied  to  it  a  savour  of  originality,  the  present  loss 
of  which  to  the  human  mind  he  views  with  a  cer- 


1  Compare  Mr.  Hardy’s  Eastern  Monachism ,  and  for  the  Buddhist 
monasteries  of  Thibet  at  the  present  time,  Mr.  Cooper’s  Pioneer  of 
Commerce.  “Undoubtedly,”  says  Dr.  Mozley  ( B .  L.,  p.  187),  “the 
doctrines  of  false  religions  have  extracted  remarkable  action  out  of 
human  nature  ;  especially  the  doctrines  of  Oriental  religions  ;  e.  g.  the 
Hindoo  doctrine  of  Absorption.  But  of  what  kind  ?  Such  as  is  more 
allied  to  phrenzy  than  morals  ;  gigantic  feats  of  self-torture,  and  self¬ 
stupefaction,”  &c.  Eastern  Christianity  had  indeed  its  Boo-kol ,  ’Akoi- 
IxrjToi,  Aevdpirai,  and  SruXZrai ;  but  when  at  the  end  of  the  sixth  century 
it  was  endeavoured  to  introduce  the  last-named  extravagance  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Treves,  the  Bishops  removed  the  pillar.— See  Gre^ 
Turon.,  VIII.  xv. 

2  See  ap.  Montalembert,  I.  27. 


Lect.  VII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


299 


tain  regret.  Some  such  charm  it  must  have  been 
which  in  modern  days  wrought  powerfully  on  the 
soul  of  a  Pascal  and  an  Arnauld.1  It  is  not  neces¬ 
sary  here  to  balance  the  good  against  the  evil  of 
asceticism,  its  follies  with  its  wisdom ;  or  to  admit 
with  Mr.  Buckle  that  “it  is  the  prevailing  taint  of 
all  clerical  teaching*,  the  inevitable  issue  of  the  whether 

...  °  ...  limited  to 

theological  spirit  if  that  spirit  is  unchecked.”2  It  certain 

1  .  stages  of 

may  or  may  not  belong  to  a  rude  stage  of  society  civiiiza- 
in  which  isolation  is  easier  and  more  accessible  ; 
and  yet  its  influences  might  be  the  more  serviceable 
in  an  age  which  measures  the  interests  of  society 
altogether  by  an  utilitarian  standard.3  Monasticism, 
in-  its  best  form  at  least  in  the  West,  did  not  repre-  Notneces- 

sa.rily 

sent  solely,  or  even  perhaps  mainly,  the  claims  of  cetic  or 

,  contem- 

than  specu-  piative. 
lative  :  it  looked  more  to  “  the  performance  of  rigid 

1  Compare  Sainte-Beuve,  Port-Royal ,  III.  285-287. 

2  III.  272.  This  author  seems  to  confound  asceticism  with  self- 
restraint  :  and  in  this  way  he  attacks  Christianity  itself,  by  impugning 
the  morality  of  the  Gospel.  What  he  really  proves  is  the  danger  of 
investing  the  clergy  with  secular  power,  or  of  accepting  as  the  com¬ 
mandments  of  God  the  inferences  of  men. 

3  Thus  Mr.  Lecky,  H.  E.  M .,  I.  136  :  “  Asceticism — including  under 
this  term  not  merely  the  monastic  system,  but  also  all  efforts  to  with¬ 
draw  from  the  world  in  order  to  cultivate  a  high  degree  of  sanctity — 
belongs  naturally  to  a  society  which  is  somewhat  rude,  and  in  which 
isolation  is  frequent  and  easy.”  See  also  Hist.  Rat II.  399-401.  In 
H.  E.  M.,  I.  155,  he  observes  :  “  The  monastic  system,  however  perni¬ 
cious  when  enlarged  to  excess,  has  undoubtedly  contributed  to  the 
happiness  of  the  world  by  supplying  an  asylum  especially  suited  to  a 
certain  type  of  character  ;  and  that  vindictive  and  short-sighted  revolu¬ 
tion  which  is  extirpating  it  from  Europe  is  destroying  one  of  the  best 
correctives  of  the  excessive  industrialism  of  our  age.” 


an  ascetic  life.  It  was  practical  more 


300 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VII. 


Its  mixed 
results, 


duty;  to  the  alternation  of  severe  toil  with  the 
observance  of  an  austere  ritual,  than  to  dreamy 
indolence  or  meditative  silence,  broken  only  by  the 
discussion  of  controverted  points  of  theology.”1 
Labour  was  part  of  the  rule  of  even  the  Eastern 
monks,  although  too  readily  abandoned  for  con¬ 
templation.2  But  the  contemplative  life,  though 
fraught  with  its  own  perils,  was  by  no  means 
necessarily  identical  with  a  course  of  self-torture, 
foreign  alike  to  the  dignity  and  true  mission  of 
man.  It  is  not  possible  within  our  present  limits 
to  dwell  on  the  services  rendered  by  the  monastic 
system  of  the  medieval  times  to  the  cause  of  civili¬ 
zation  and  to  the  progress  of  mankind.  It  has  been 

1  Milman,  Lat.  Christ I.  382.  So  Guizot  (II.  G5),  speaking  of  the 
monasteries  of  Lerins  and  S.  Victor,  remarks,  “  It  was  by  no  means  with 
solitude  or  with  mortification,  but  with  discussion  and  activity,  that 
they  concerned  themselves.”  See  the  fine  passage  on  the  agricultural 
industry  of  the  Monks  of  the  West,  in  Montalcmbcrt,  I.  p.  7.  This 
writer  deems,  however,  the  signal  service  of  Monasticism  to  have  lain  in 
its  fostering  a  spirit  of  prayer,  and  in  the  intercessions  continually 
offered  to  the  Throne  of  Grace  for  the  sins  of  mankind,  I.  p.  xlviii. 

2  Bernardus  vallcs,  colics  Benedictus  amabat:  says  an  old  verse. 
“  The  Fathers,”  writes  Mr.  Lecky,  II.  Bat.,  II.  2G1,  “  employed  all  their 
eloquence  in  favour  of  labour  ;  but  it  is  to  the  monks,  and  especially  to 
the  Benedictine  monks,  that  the  change  is  pre-eminently  due.”  See 
also  II.  E.  ill.,  II.  165,  where  lie  quotes  the  rule  of  S.  Paphnutius,  “To 
love  labour  more  than  rest,”  &e.,  and  p.  218,  “  Scholars,  too,  adds  the 
old  chronicler,  arc  martyrs  if  they  live  in  purity  and  labour  with 
courage.”  At  a  time  when  religious  enthusiasm  was  all  directed  towards 
the  monastic  life  as  towards  the  ideal  of  perfection,  they  made  labour  an 
essential  part  of  their  discipline.  Schmidt,  Essai,  p.  228,  remarks  that 
the  motto  of  Christianity  at  this  period  was  not  the  rights  of  labour,  but 
the  duty  of  labour.  It  was  told  of  Becket  that  he  habitually  performed 
harvest  work  at  the  monasteries  with  the  monks.  See  Ilallam,  M.  A 
III.  360,  12th  cd. 


Lect.  VII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY, \ 


301 


called  the  school  whence  issued  great  minds  and 
madmen.1  Certainly,  whatever  may  be  thought 
of  the  vain  attempt  to  find  Christian  perfection 
in  ignoring;  one-half  of  human  nature ;  in  consti- 
tilting  (as  was  too  often  done)  one  long,  unbroken  ^°"*et'on 
penance  for  the  true  Christian  life  ;  in  measuring  erroneous 

I  elements, 

holiness  by  suffering,  and  saintly  excellence  by 

prayer  and  pain  :  whether  it  be  one  stage  in  the 

history  of  thought  and  feeling  through  which 

man’s  mind  and  soul  pass  on  to  other  and  nobler 

things ;  yet  doubtless  from  the  cloistered  homes  of 

medieval  life  went  forth  the  thinkers  and  workers  its  un¬ 
doubted 

who  should  mould  the  intellectual  frame  and  even  services  to 

•  9  ~yir  medieval 

the  political  life  of  coming  generations.2  r  or  Mo-  chris- 
nasticism  led  on  the  one  hand  through  Scholasticism 
to  a  vast  expansion  of  the  human  understanding ; 
on  the  other,  though  to  itself  unconsciously,  to  the 
overthrow  of  hierarchical  and  sacerdotal  influence. 


1  “  Do  cette  rude  ecole  du  desert  il  sortait  de  grands  homines  et  des 
fous.” — V illemain,  Melanges ,  p.  356.  Comte,  PHI.  Pos .,  V.  348, 
regards  the  monks  as  “  une  milice  contemplative.’3  They  were  called 
“  la  Chevalerie  de  Dieu.”  He  holds  that  Christian  Asceticism  tended 
to  abase  the  passions  before  the  intellectual  principle  ;  and  that  by  its 
monastic  orders  and  property  the  Church  founded  an  industrial  agricul¬ 
tural  spirit. 

2  «  Monastic  Christianity  led  to  two  unexpected  but  inevitable 
results ;  to  the  expansion  of  the  human  understanding,  even  till  it  strove 
to  overleap  the  lofty  barriers  of  the  established  Catholic  doctrine  ; 
and  to  a  sullen  and  secret  mutiny,  at  length  to  an  open  insurrection, 
against  the  power  of  the  sacerdotal  order.” — Milman,  L.  Chr .,  III.  239. 
“  Monastic  life  in  its  rise  had  neither  the  contemplative  nor  solitary 
character;  on  the  contrary,  it  was  highly  social  and  active ;  it  kindled 
a  focus  of  intellectual  development ;  it  served  as  the  instrument  of 
fermentation  and  propagation  of  ideas,” — Guizot,  Civ.  en  Fr.,  I.  355. 


302 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VII. 


Its  testi¬ 
mony  to 
the  spiri¬ 
tual  influ¬ 
ence  of  the 
religion. 


Its  moral 
defects. 


These 

qualified. 


But  that  with  which  we  are  now  concerned  is  the 
intensity  of  spiritual  control  exercised  by  monastic 
Christianity,  and  the  loftiness  of  its  type  compared 
with  over-developments  of  the  ascetic  tendency. 
No  doubt,  its  weak  point,  the  inherent  defect  of  all 
asceticism,  was  its  real  selfishness.  Its  avowed  end 
was  the  individual  salvation  of  its  votaries  :  this 
their  dominant  all-absorbing  thought.  The  good 
done  was  in  a  large  measure  incidental,  or  at  least 
secondary.  “Even  their  charities,”  it  has  been 
truly  observed,  “  went  to  relieve  their  own  souls  : 
to  lay  up  for  themselves  treasures  of  good  works, 
rather  than  from  any  real  sympathy  with  the 
people.”1  Their  imitation  of  Christ  began  in  self, 
terminated  in  self :  it  knew  not  the  truer,  humbler 
self-sacrifice  of  daily  life  for  parent,  wife,  and 
child.2  And  yet  it  was  in  many  wa}^s  a  true  self- 
sacrifice  :  not  the  mere  maceration  of  the  flesh  of  a 
fakir.  In  the  older  and  nobler  forms  of  monastic 
life  the  loftier  ideal  combining  active  good  with 
personal  craving  after  holiness  was  still  present. 
From  the  cloister  came  the  most  zealous  Bishops : 
the  most  devoted  and  successful  missionaries.  In 
later  times  this  spirit  revived  in  the  Mendicant  and 
Preaching,  and,  in  a  different  direction,  in  the  Mili- 

1  Milman,  IV.  156.  Compare  Neander,  Ch.  H.,  VII.  325,  andLecky, 
II.  E.  M.,  II.  99,  who  remarks  on  the  identity  of  feeling  expressed  by 
Sir  T.  Brown,  Eel.  Med.,  II.  §  2 :  “I  give  no  alms  to  satisfy  the  hunger 
of  my  brother,  but  to  fulfil  and  accomplish  the  will  and  command  of  my 
God.” 

2  Cf.  Id.  VI.  306. 


Lect.  VII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


303 


tary  Orders.  They  spent  themselves  gladly  for  their 
brethren.  The  very  capacity  which  has  often  been  its  ten- 

.  .  1  17  .  .  dency  to 

remarked  in  Monasticism  of  renewing  its  yonth  and  seif-rege- 

.  .  .  .  .  neration. 

reverting  to  the  first  principles  of  its  constitution 
proves  the  same  thing.1  There  was  the  true  salt 
within  :  and  it  had  not  lost  its  savour.  The  spirit 
of  self-sacrifice  was  working  still :  and  on  the  inten¬ 
sity  of  that  spirit,  it  has  been  truly  said,  “  depends 
the  moral  elevation  of  an  age,  and  upon  its  course 
the  religious  future  of  the  world.”  The  faith  which 
forged  this  instrument  to  its  use,  was  no  baseless 
dream :  it  struck  deep  into  the  roots  of  human 
nature,  and  drew  upon  its  most  heroic  qualities.2  Its 
best  enthusiasm  became  its  minister :  it  wrought siasm* 
its  appointed  work  till  “  the  history  of  self-sacrifice 
has  become  the  history  of  the  action  of  Christianity 
upon  the  world.”3  The  lofty  and  unworldly  con¬ 
ceptions,  born  of  the  faith  of  Jesus  Christ,  gave  it 
its  type  and  beauty ;  and  so  called  it  into  being. 

To  their  influence  from  first  to  last,  while  pure  and 
uncorrupt,  it  has  borne  its  witness  of  truth. 

1  Comp.  Robertson,  C.  H .,  II.  698.  See  Ranke,  Popes,  II.  i.  3. 

2  “  The  Middle  Ages,”  says  Montalembert,  “  were  the  heroic  age  of 
Christianity.”  Comp.  Lecky,  H.  Rat.,  II.  267. 

3  Lecky,  u.  s .,  p.  405.  Milman,  I.  234,  thus  sums  up  the  benefits 
secured  by  Western  Monasticism :  “  It  compensated  for  its  usurpation 
of  the  dignity  of  a  higher  and  holier  Christianity,  by  becoming  the 
guardian  of  what  was  valuable,  the  books  and  arts  of  the  old  world  ;  the 
missionary  of  what  was  holy  and  Christian  in  the  new  civilization ;  the 
chief  maintainer,  if  not  the  restorer,  of  agriculture  in  Italy  ;  the  culti¬ 
vator  of  the  forests  and  morasses  of  the  North ;  the  apostle  of  the 
heathens  which  dwelt  beyond  the  pale  of  the  Roman  empire.”  See  also 
Hallam,  M.  A.,  III.  301. 


304 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VII. 


The 

Crusades. 


Different 
estimates 
of  their 
results. 


§  2.  In  a  review,  however  rapid,  of  the  spirit  and 
efficacy  of  medieval  Christianity,  some  estimate  of 
the  Crusades  can  hardly  be  omitted.  They  have  been 
said  to  “  have  revealed  Europe  as  Christian,”1  and 
form,  indeed,  the  turning-point  of  its  history  from 
the  eleventh  to  the  thirteenth  century.  Their  good 
and  ill,  their  motive  and  character,  have  been 
variously  estimated,  and  will  always  he  diversely 
apprehended.  Unjust,  chimerical,  unwise  ;  lavish  of 
blood  and  treasure,  beggaring  families  and  nations: 
squandering  the  lives  of  a  Barbarossa  and  a  Saint 
Louis ;  the  causes  and  pretexts  of  misery,  immo¬ 
rality,  and  tyranny  at  home,  of  increased  ecclesias¬ 
tical  domination  in  Pope  and  clergy  ; 2  yet  no  less 
the  source  of  subsequent  heresy  and  revolution : 
they  have  been  held  up  to  condemnation  as  the 
type-instance  of  the  fatality  attaching  to  religious 
wars.  Yet  it  is  probably  a  truer  view  which  re¬ 
gards  them  as  a  defensive  and  not  an  aggressive 
struggle ; 3  as  entered  upon  to  raise  a  bulwark 
against  Mahommedanism  in  Palestine  rather  than 


1  See  Guizot,  I.  149. 

2  “  The  Crusades  had  made  the  Pope  not  merely  the  spiritual  but  in 
some  sort  the  military  suzerain  of  Europe.” — Milman,  HI.  439.  On 
the  miseries  and  ill-effects  attaching  to  the  Crusades,  comp.  Hallam, 
M.  A.,  I.  36,  111.  307. 

3  See  a  good  summary  in  Canon  Robertson’s  Ch.  Hist .,  II.  644,  645, 
and  compare  Gibbon,  c.  lxi.  'On  the  defensive  character  ot  the  Crusades, 
comp.  De  Maistrc  ( Du  Pape ,  Liv.  IV.,  CEuvres ,  p.  450).  Gibbon,  indeed, 
(c.  lviii.)  observes,  somewhat  narrowly,  that  “  Palestine  could  add 
nothing  to  the  strength  or  safety  of  the  Latins.”  Milman  comments 
fairly  that  the  whole  question  of  the  justice  of  the  Crusades  turns  on  this 
point  (VII.  185,  ed.  Smith). 


Lect.  VII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


305 


in  Spain.  If  fraught  with  temporary  evils,  they 
yet  abounded  in  ultimate  benefits  ;  knitting  the 
nations  of  Europe  in  one  common  sentiment,  in  one 
common  interest :  and  that  by  a  holy  bond  draw¬ 
ing  each  knight  and  baron  from  petty  personal 
strifes  to  strike  for  a  hallowed  cause :  educating; 
them  in  the  spirit  of  chivalry  and  generous  compe¬ 
tition  with  the  stranger  races  of  East  and  West,1 
and  borrowing  from  these  their  different  civiliza¬ 
tion  ;  navigation  and  commerce  were  improved  : 
the  wealth  of  the  trading  classes  increased  :  the 
number  of  fiefs  lessened,  and  the  anarchy  of  the 
times  thus  reduced.  Many  of  these  results,  it  is 
true,  may  be  judged  to  be  incidental  to  the  course 
of  affairs ;  and  this,  it  may  be  said,  cannot  be  con¬ 
sidered  to  belong  to  the  framework  of  the  Christian 
system.  They  show,  however,  the  manner  in  which 
under  the  Providence  of  Gfod  the  operation  of 
Christianity  blended  with  the  career  of  civilization 
and  improvement,  till  it  becomes  difficult  to  assign 
to  either  its  relative  degree  of  importance.  Had 
Christian  zeal  in  the  person  of  a  Bernard  never 
kindled  the  spirit  of  the  Crusades ;  while  it  is  pos¬ 
sible  that  Christian  Europe  might  have  succumbed 
in  detail  to  the  attacks  of  Islam,  it  is  certain  that 
the  progress  of  material  improvement  must  have 
been  indefinitely  delayed.  But,  whatever  estimate 


Ultimate 
services 
rendered 
by  them  to 
Europe. 


Many  of 
these  in¬ 
cidental. 


F urnish  an 
example  of 
the  opera¬ 
tion  of 
Christian 
influence 
on  the 
course  of 
civiliza¬ 
tion. 


1  See  Guizot,  I.  154.  Gibbon  thinks  the  advantage  wholly  on  the 
side  of  the  West.  See  Mr.  Lecky’s  remarks,  II.  E.  M.,  II.  260,  267. 


X 


3  06 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VII. 


In  them¬ 
selves  a  re¬ 
markable 
witness  to 
the  power 
of  religious 
influence, 


counter¬ 
vailing 
Mahome¬ 
tan  fanati¬ 
cism, 


be  taken  of  their  political  or  social  results,  there 
can  be  but  one  view  of  the  religious  import  of  the 
Crusades.1  They  stand  forth,  the  proud  answer  of 
Christendom  to  the  challenge  thrown  down  by  the 
creed  of  Mahomet.  If  its  votaries  were  ready- 
minded  to  seek  death  on  the  battle-field  in  witness 
of  their  faith,  so  too  did  the  followers  of  Christ. 
They  wended  even  gladly  on  a  pilgrimage  of  mar¬ 
tyrdom  ;  and  gave  joyfully  their  lives,  as  they  sup¬ 
posed,  in  the  cause  of  their  dear  and  outraged  Lord. 
Not  indeed,  as  the  Moslem,  to  behold  the  face  of 
Allah  through  the  blood  of  the  infidel :  but  to  win 
back  from  pollution  the  honoured  shrine  of  Beth¬ 
lehem  and  the  ever-hallowed  Mount  of  Calvary.2 

1  Speaking  of  the  English  Crusaders,  Matthew  of  Paris  says,  “  Indig- 
num  quippe  judicabant  animarum  suarum  salutem  omittere  et  obse- 
quium  coelestis  Regis  clientele  regis  alicujus  terreni  postponere.”  Hist. 
Maj.,  p.  671,  quoted  by  Mr.  Buckle,  B.  Civ.,  II.  6,  who  adds  that  the 
first  tax  ever  imposed  in  England  on  personal  property  was  in  1166,  for 
the  Crusade. 

2  To  chase  these  Pagans  in  those  holy  fields 
Over  whose  acres  walked  those  Blessed  1  eet, 

Which  fourteen  hundred  years  ago  were  nailed 
For  our  advantage  on  the  bitter  Cross. 

Gibbon’s  well-known  criticism  that  “  the  God  of  the  Christians  is  not  a 
local  Deity,  and  that  the  recovery  of  Bethlem  or  Calvary,  his  cradle  or 
his  tomb,  will  not  atone  for  the  violation  of  the  moral  precepts  of  the 
Gospel,”  will  be  seen  to  be  beside  the  mark  of  the  present  argument, 
which  turns  not  on  the  justice  or  propriety  of  religious  wars,  but  on 
their  mode  of  exhibiting  the  spiritual  character  of  an  age  and  the  power 
of  religion  as  a  practical  motive.  “  The  Crusades,”  Dean  Milman 
admits,  “  are  monuments  of  human  folly ;  but  to  which  of  the  more 
regular  wars  of  civilized  Europe,  waged  for  personal  ambition  or  national 
jealousy,  will  our  calmer  reason  appeal  as  monuments  either  of  human 
justice  or  human  wisdom  ?  ” 


Lect.  VII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY, 


307 


It  has  been  hinted  that  these  were,  after  all,  the 
superstitious  efforts  of  a  dreaming  age,  inspired  by 
an  unreasoning  enthusiasm ;  which  is  past  never  to 
return,  and  indicates  accordingly  the  decline  of  the 
spirit  of  religion.  “  The  Crusader’s  sword,”  it  is 
said,1  “  has  long  been  shattered  ;  his  achievements 
idolized  by  the  poet  and  the  novelist.  Liberty,  and 
not  theology,  is  the  enthusiasm  of  the  nineteenth 
century.”  Yet  the  same  writer  has  elsewhere and. ex- 

.  .  .  hibiting 

frankly  admitted,2  that  “  while  ignorance  and  error  the  fund  of 

Christian 

have,  no  doubt,  often  directed  the  heroic  spirit  into  enthu- 
wrong  channels,  and  have  sometimes  even  made  it 
a  cause  of  great  evil  to  mankind ;  yet  the  power  of 
Christianity  to  evoke  and  sustain  the  highest,  the 
most  enlarged  conceptions,  can  cease  only  with  the 
annihilation  of  the  moral  nature  of  mankind.”  We 
may  be  pardoned,  then,  if  we  connect  these  triumphs 
of  the  strength  of  our  holy  Religion  in  less  enligh¬ 
tened  ages,  not  merely  with  man’s  moral  capacities, 
but  with  his  spiritual  insight :  if  we  see  in  them 
not  only  a  possible  but  an  actual  union  of  the 
heroic  with  the  religious  virtues,  of  the  patriot  with  according 
the  saint,3  after  the  apprehension  of  those  far-off  know- 
times  ;  if  we  read  in  them  an  evidence  of  a  Faith  the  time. 


1  See  Lecky,  Hist,  of  Rationalism ,  II.  244. 

2  i&.,  p.  405. 

3  “  In  the  Middle  Ages  the  saintly  type  being  the  standard  of  perfec¬ 
tion,  the  heroic  type  was  almost  entirely  unappreciated.  The  nearest 
approach  to  it  was  exhibited  by  the  Crusader,  whose  valour  was  never¬ 
theless  all  subordinated  to  superstition,  and  whose  whole  career  was  of  the 
nature  of  a  penance.” — Lecky,  H.  R .,  II.  222. 

x  2 


3°8 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VII. 


Want  of 
discrimi¬ 
nation  as 
to  the 
separate 
agencies 
in  the  con¬ 
struction 
of  modern 
Europe. 


ever  progressive,  working  after  the  measure  of  the 
knowledge  of  the  age,  even  according  to  the  pro¬ 
mise  of  its  Founder  “  overcoming  the  world  now 
“  subduing  kingdoms  now  “  quenching  the  vio¬ 
lence  of  fire;”  now  “  waxing  valiant  in  fight;” 
“  turning  to  flight  the  armies  of  the  aliens  ;”  yet 
always  and  in  all  things  more  than  conqueror 
“  through  Him  that  loved  us.” 

§  3.  Much  evil,  it  must  he  admitted,  has  been 
done  to  the  cause  of  Christian  Truth  by  indis¬ 
criminate  laudation;1  or,  at  least,  through  an 
over-estimate  of  its  effects,  by  way  of  answer  to 
censures  equally  exaggerated.  There  are  some 
who  have  seen  in  Christianity  the  sole  and 
sufficient  agent  in  the  work  of  civilization,  dis¬ 
joining  it,  like  a  fragmentary  episode,2  from  the 
ordinary  influences  at  work  upon  the  face  of 
society.  We  have  seen  cause,  with  stricter  and 
more  profound  thinkers,  to  take  a  different  course. 
Christianity  has  been,  no  doubt,  a  leading  and  a 
distinct  element  in  modern  civilization ;  but  it  has3 

1  See  some  good  remarks  on  this  point  in  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  V.  328. 

2  Ovk  eoL<€  S’  f)  (frvcns  eneicrodLoobrjs  ovcra,  coancp  po^Otjpa  rpaycoSla. 
— Arist.,  Metaph.j  XIII.  iii. 

3  “  C’est  la  le  beau  role  de  la  communaute  chretienne  sur  la  terre : 
elle  est  comme  un  ferment  de  l’humanite,  destine  a  Ini  communiquer  le 
principe  fecond  et  indestructible  d’une  vie  nouvellesans  toucher  violem- 
ment  aux  institutions  etablies.  Ardents  pour  la  conversion  des  indi- 
vidus,  les  Apotres  attendaient  sans  impatience  le  renouvellement  des 
formes  sociales.  Us  l’abandonnaient  a  Taction  du  temps  et  a  la  puissance 
irresistible  de  l’Esprit  de  Jesus-Christ.  Toutefois  s’ils  ont  respecte  les 
lois  existantes,  ils  ont  indique  en  meme  temps  les  principes  destines  a 
les  modifier  en  les  conformant  a  la  nature  du  Royaume  de  Dieu.” — 
Schmidt,  Essai ,  p.  175. 


Lect.  VII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


309 


worked  in  conjunction  with  other  forces.  And  it 
is  difficult  accordingly,  in  some  cases,  to  award 
duly  the  proportions  of  the  resultant  effect.  VYe 
have  already  seen  that  Roman  civilization  left  its 
legacy  of  complex  influences  in  its  Municipal 
system  and  Imperial  traditions.  We  have  seen 
likewise  that  in  the  physical  and  psychical 
elements  of  the  Barbarian  stock,  in  their  inherited 
associations  and  ideas,  fresh  principles  of  recon¬ 
struction  were  added  to  modern  society.  As  what  Por" 

47  tion  due  to 

Christianity  modified  the  manners  and  tempera-  *ecahcr^son 
ment  of  the  Teutonic  race,  so  was  there,  in  some  tianity. 
respects,  an  inverse  action  on  the  form  and  direc¬ 
tion  of  Christianity  itself.  No  competent  thinker 
will  either  deny  the  importance  of  Feudalism  as  an 
element  in  the  general  progress  of  these  ages,  or 
seek  to  attribute  its  consequences  to  the  teaching 
or  influence  of  Christianity.1  It  coincided,  how-  J.ts  rela" 
ever,  with  the  spirit  of  the  new  Religion  in  raising  fenuda1' 
the  moral  tone  of  society.  Feudalism  was  itself 
the  mingled  outcome  of  German  loyalty  and 
German  independence.  The  progress2  of  society 
from  villages  and  manorial  residences  to  towns 

1  Mr.  Freeman,  Norman  Conquest ,  I.  97,  distinguishes  between  the 
elements  of  Feudalism  and  a  Feudal  system.  In  the  former,  the 
Church  could  have  no  share,  however  readily  she  co-operated  in  de¬ 
veloping  the  latter.  Thus,  a  vast  number  of  the  ancient  Charters  are 
in  favour  of  the  Church. 

2  “  We  must  distinguish,”  says  Hallam,  M.  A.,  I.  p.  351,  N.  xviii., 

“  the  corporate  towns  or  communities  from  the  other  class  called  bur¬ 
gages,  bourgeoisies.  The  Chatelains  encouraged  the  growth  of  villages 
around  their  castles,  from  whom  they  often  derived  assistance  in  war, 

&c.”  In  a  former  passage,  he  attributes  more  to  the  action  of  Chris- 


3io 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VII. 


and  trading  boroughs  was  due,  not  to  any  eccle¬ 
siastical  arrangement  of  parishes,  but  to  the 
operation  of  feudal  tenures.  They  were,  in  fact, 
the  molecules  of  Feudalism.  Yet  the  operation 
and  distribution  of  religious  influence  was  pro¬ 
bably  rendered  more  favourable  by  this  condition 
its  joint  of  things.  So  the  extinction  of  .  serfdom,  though 


operation. 


frequently  assigned  to  its  authority,  was  mainly,1 
perhaps,  due  to  secondary  causes  originating  in 
the  state  of  affairs  just  named.  The  altered 
position  of  woman  in  modern  society,2  though, 

Jtianity.  “  The  subjection  of  a  heathen  tribe  is  totally  different  from 
that  of  a  Christian  province.  With  the  Church  came  churches,  and 
for  churches  there  must  be  towns,  and  for  towns  a  magistracy,  and  for 
magistracy  law.” — lb.,  I.  p.  121.  See  Adam  Smith,  Wealth  of  Nations, 
III.  iii.,  on  the  rise  and  progress  of  cities  and  towns. 

1  See  Hallam,  M.  A.,  I.  197-202.  In  1167,  Alexander  III.  declared 
all  Christians  exempt  from  slavery.  See  Voltaire,  Essais ,  tom.  ii.  c.  83. 

2  Thus,  Guizot,  Civ.  en  E.,  I.  71 :  “  Was  it  not  within  the  bosom  of 
the  feudal  family  that  the  importance  of  women  developed  itself?”  and 
especially  the  picture  drawn  by  him  of  the  wife  as  Chatelaine,  Civ.  en  Fr., 
III.  91.  “  This  elevated  and  almost  sovereign  position,  in  the  very  bosom 
of  domestic  life,  often  gave  to  the  women  of  the  feudal  period  a  dignity, 
a  courage,  virtues,  a  distinction,  which  they  have  displayed  nowhere  else, 
and  has,  doubtless,  powerfully  contributed  to  their  moral  development 
and  the  general  improvement  of  their  condition.”  Too  much  import¬ 
ance  has,  no  doubt,  been  assigned  to  the  consideration  in  which  women 
were  held  by  the  German  tribes  (Tacitus,  Ceim.,  xviii.  xix.).  Mr.  Lecky, 
however,  in  his  elaborate  Essay,  has  pointed  out  some  ingredients  in 
this  subject  due  to  the  action  of  Christianity,  as  the  tendency  of  the 
religion  to  the  milder  virtues,  the  feminine  ideal  of  the  Virgin,  the 
Christian  laws  of  chastity,  the  part  played  by  feminine  martyrs,  &c. 
See  also  Dean  Merivale,  North.  Nations,  Lect.  viii.  Had  Asceticism 
been  a  strictly  Christian  virtue,  it  must  have  been  reckoned  as  tending 
to  debase  the  position  of  women  (II.  E.  M.,  II.  336,  389 ;  II.  Bat.,  I. 
235). 


Lect.  VII.]  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  3^ 

to  some  extent,  due  to  the  preceding  efforts  and 
to  the  co-operation  of  Christianity,  as  well  as  to 
doctrines  immediately  connected  with  its  system, 
has  been,  with  reason,  traced  to  circumstances 
arising  simply  out  of  Feudalism.  Chivalry  itself,  ^nrselt*" 
which  also  has  been  claimed  for  a  Christian  insti-  chivalry, 
tution,1  may,  with  better  right,  he  called  the 
daughter  of  the  feudal  system.  The  estimate  of 
its  influence  in  elevating  and  refining  the  tone  of 
modern  society  can  hardly  be  over-charged.  Yet 
the  joint  efforts  of  Christianity  to  lend  it  all  the 
strength  of  a  hallowing  faith,  cemented  by 
religious  ceremonies  and  fostered  by  religious 
promises,  are  too  well  known  to  need  description 
or  comment.  Thus,  then,  in  all  these  cases  it  is 
not  contended  that  Religion  has  been  the  only 
influence  at  work  in  eliciting  our  modern  civiliza¬ 
tion  ;  but  rather  that  it  has  exercised  a  continuous 
and  independent  function.  Even  its  crowning 

1  As  by  Sismondi,  Hist.  d.  Fr .,  IV.  201 :  “At  an  epoch  when  reli¬ 
gious  zeal  became  reanimated,  when  valour  still  seemed  the  most  worthy 
of  ail  offerings  that  men  could  present  to  the  Deity,  it  is  not  suipiising 
that  they  should  have  invented  a  military  ordination,  and  that  chivalry 
should  have  appeared  a  second  priesthood,  destined  in  a  more  active 
manner  to  the  Divine  service.”  Guizot,  however,  finds  chivalry  to  be 
“  the  spontaneous  consequence  of  Germanic  manners  and  feudal  rela¬ 
tions ;  ”  and  that  “religion  and  imagination,  the  Church  and  poetry, 
took  possession  of  chivalry,  making  it  a  powerful  means  of  attaining 
the  ends  which  they  pursued,  of  fulfilling  the  moral  needs  which  it  was 
their  mission  to  satisfy.”  See  at  length  Civ.en  Fr .,  III.  Le?.  vi.  ;  and 
Hallam,  M.  A.,  III.  395,  396,  who  traces  it  to  the  age  of  Charlemagne. 

See  the  sketch  of  the  relation  of  chivalry  to  the  Church  in  Robertson 

( a .  H.t  II.  507). 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VII. 


312 


Corrup¬ 
tions  of 
medieval 
Chris-  \ 
tianity 


benefit  of  distinguishing  between  the  spiritual  and 
the  temporal  power  is  in  a  measure  due  to  other 

Teutonic6  anc^  secu^ar  causes.  For  while  recognized  funda- 
character.  mentally  by  the  Religion  of  Christ,  and  enforced  in 

its  organization,  it  was  no  less  congenial  to  that 
spirit  of  personal  and  individual  liberty  introduced 
in  the  Teutonic  nature  into  modern  society.1  The 
believer  was  not  absorbed  in  the  Deity  whom  he 
worshipped  or  in  the  Church  of  which  he  was  a 
member,  nor  was  the  individual  man  sacrificed,  as 
in  the  Republics  of  old,  to  the  citizen. 

§  4.  The  incontestable  fact  that  the  course  of 
Christianity  has  been  affected  in  all  its  institutions 
and  many  of  its  doctrines  by  the  infirmities  of 
human  nature  and  the  historical  circumstances  of 
its  advance,2  has  led  to  unfavourable  but  ground- 

1  See  M.  Guizot’s  excellent  summary,  Civ.  en  Fr .,  tom.  i.  Lee.  vii. 
sub  fin. :  “  The  spirit  of  legality  came  to  us  from  the  Roman  world.  To 
Christianity  we  owe  the  spirit  of  morality,  the  sentiment  and  empire  of 
rule,  of  a  moral  law,  of  the  mutual  duties  of  men.  The  Germans  con¬ 
ferred  upon  us  the  spirit  of  liberty  as  we  conceive  it  in  the  present  day, 
&c.”  Liberty  of  thought,  indeed,  he  elsewhere  (Lef.  xxx.)  attributes 
justly  to  Greco-Roman  civilization.  This  was  received  neither  from 
Christianity  nor  from  Germany,  but  is  an  idea  which  is  essentially  the 
daughter  of  antiquity.  See  Mr.  Lechy’s  remarks,  H.  E.  M.,  II.  197, 
on  the  relation  of  feudal  organizations  to  the  Church.  Dean  Merivale, 
Northern  Nations ,  p.  127,  holds  that  “  patriotism  was  a  Pagan  virtue, 
but  loyalty  is  a  Christian  grace.”  “  To  his  own  Lord  the  Christian  must 
stand  or  fall.  And  as  patriotism  was  the  classical,  so  was  loyalty  the 
feudal  principle.” 

2  Compare  the  testimony  of  Jerome  (Fit.  Match.,  submit.).  “  Scriberc 
disposui  ab  adventu  Salvatoris  usque  ad  nostram  setatem,  quo  modo  et 
per  quos  Christi  Ecclesia  nata  sit;  etadulta,persecutionibus  creverit  et 
martyriis  coronata  sit;  et  postquam  ad  Christianos  principes  venerit 
polentia  quidem  et  divitiis  major,  sod  virtutibus  minor  facta  sit.” 


Lect.  VII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


313 


less  criticisms  of  its  authority  and  value.  I  have 
already  alluded  to  causes  which,  in  the  Eastern 
Church,  debased  the  genius  of  Christianity,  cor¬ 
rupted  its  practice,  and  arrested  its  progress.  It 
is  plain  that  as  the  Religion  enlarged  its  boundaries 
and  established  its  predominance,  its  moral  effects 
would  decline,  for  various  reasons.  There  may  inevitable 
well  be  a  tendency,  under  a  rigid  dogmatic  system, 
for  morals  to  assume  the  form  of  positive  com¬ 
mands,  and  thus  to  lose  their  spiritual  savour.  To 
speak,  however,  of  no  other  cause  of  declension, 
the  inducements  of  temporal  advancement  were 
now  on  the  side  of  conversion  instead  of  being 
against  it.  The  establishment  of  a  State  Chris-  fr°m  its 

political 

tianity  led  indirectly  to  the  repetition  of  General  position. 
Councils,  as  a  ready  instrument ;  these  to  the 
inevitable  enforcement  of  often  transcendental 
dogmas;  these,  by  a  reaction,  to  political  dis- ^[ta^ls 
putes  and  to  theological  intrigue  and  persecu¬ 
tion.  Orthodoxy  now  brought  its  own  reward; 
and  sanguinary  contests  for  pre-eminence  usurped 
that  rivalry  of  love,  which  had  once  been  the 
honourable  badge  of  the  earliest  believers  in 
Christ.  44  The  very  scenes,’’  we  are  told,  44  of 
the  Saviour’s  mercies  ran  with  blood  shed  in  His 
name  by  His  ferocious  self-called  disciples.”  1  The 
growing  necessity  of  conforming  a  new  faith  to 
the  apprehensions  and  habits  of  barbarous  races 

1  Milman,  Lat.  Chr.,  I.  213. 


314 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VII. 


led  of  itself,  in  many  ways,  to  a  direct  variation 
of  its  standard,  both  as  to  morals  and  religious 
yet  neces-  belief.1  This,  however,  it  must  be  remembered  is 
pems-  no  evidence  of  intrinsic  or  permanent  declension, 
progress  It  has  been  truly  observed  that  u  the  very  offences 
signalized  are  a  token  of  progress,  since  it  is  the 
strongest  proof  of  the  firm  hold  of  a  party,  whether 
religious  or  political,  upon  the  public  mind,  when 
it  may  offend  with  impunity  against  its  own 
primary  principles.  That  which  at  one  time  is 
a  sign  of  incurable  weakness  or  approaching 
dissolution,  at  another  seems  but  the  excess  of 
healthful  energy  and  the  evidence  of  unbroken 
vigour.” 2  It  was  not,  then,  to  be  expected  but 
that  in  the  West  also  Christianity  should  exhibit 
transitions  often  foreign  to  the  spirit  of  its  teach¬ 
ing.  Amidst  the  barbarian  elements  among  which 
it  had  to  work,  Christianity  itself  began  to  bar- 
in  a  bar-  barize.  As  the  price  of  its  influence  on  an  age 
and  nation,  dark  and  superstitious,  its  doctrines  were  exhibited 
in  a  debased,  ambiguous  form,  productive  of  last¬ 
ing  consequences  on  the  purity  of  the  faith.  As 
the  cost  of  its  power  over  a  warlike  aristocracy, 
and  of  its  establishment  by  the  side  of  feudal 
its  miii-  institutions,  the  higher  clergy  are  seen  assuming 

racter.  1  gee  Dean  Milman’s  remark,  Lat.  Chr.,  I.  443  :  “  The  historian  who 

should  presume  to  condemn  this  universal  popular  religion  as  a  vast 
plan  of  fraud,  or  the  philosopher  who  should  venture  to  disdain  it  as  a 
fabric  of  folly,  would  be  equally  unjust,  blind  to  its  real  uses,  assuredly 
ignorant  of  its  importance  and  its  significance  in  the  history  of  man.” 
a  See  Ilobertson,  C.  II,  I,  143. 


Lect.  VII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


315 


the  character  and  pursuits  of  barons  and  the 
employments  of  a  warlike  profession.1  The 
growing  strength  of  the  Mahometan  invasion 
gave  rise  to  wars  which,  having  the  defence  of 
religion  for  their  aim,  threw  a  decent  cloak  over 
the  martial  tendencies  of  Bishops  and  Abbots,  and 
gave  to  the  Christianity  of  the  age  a  military  and 
violent  aspect.  The  Crusades,  which  had  proved 
so  serviceable  an  instrument  for  extending  eccle¬ 
siastical  and  Papal  influence,  were  not  readily 
allowed  to  cease.  They  were  continued  with Rellgious 
greater  success  and  more  barbarity,  in  the  form 
of  religious  wars  against  heretical  and  unortho¬ 
dox  sectaries.  Nor  were  these  contests  confined 
solely  to  the  aim,  however  unjustifiable,  of  esta¬ 
blishing  uniformity  of  belief  by  force  of  arms.  The 
claims  and  encroachments  of  the  Papal  and  sacer¬ 
dotal  systems  upon  the  temporal  power  of  the 
European  monarchies  involved  grievous  and  con¬ 
tinual  conflicts.  The  questions  of  Investiture  and 
of  the  particular  relations  of  the  Papacy  to  the 
personal  rights  of  sovereigns  were  urged  with 
varying  fortunes,  but  undiminished  persistency, 
until  the  close  of  the  thirteenth  century.  Then  Decline  of 
came  the  ebb  in  the  tide  of  spiritual  domination,  powerPal 

from  close 

1  Comp.  Gieseler,  II.  374,  ed.  Clark;  Hallam,  M.  A .,  c.  II.  Ft.  ii.  of  thir- 
Tkey  were  used  by  the  German  sovereigns  as  a  balance  of  power  against  teenth 
the  nobles,  thus  receiving  whole  counties  as  fiefs,  but  with  the  obliga-  centuiy* 
tions  of  feudal  tenure,  e.  g.  military  service,  the  leading  troops  in  person, 

&c.  This  custom  may  be  traced  as  late  as  Agincourt.  See  Lecky, 

E.  E  M.,  II.  265. 


316 


THE  PERMANENCE 


[Lect.  VII. 


Moral 
dignity 
of  the 
Papacy. 


which  had  overflowed  the  several  kingdoms  of 
the  West.  “  Slowly,”  says  Hallam,1  “  like  the 
retreat  of  waters  or  the  stealthy  pace  of  old  age, 
that  extraordinary  power  over  human  opinion, 
the  Papal  Empire,  has  for  five  centuries  been 
subsiding.”  But  how  had  its  tyranny  arisen  ? 
Where  lay  the  hidden  secret  of  its  power  ? 
Where  hut  in  the  mission  it  existed  to  fulfil  ?  In 
its  hold  upon  ages  of  anarchy  and  ignorance,  of 
brute  force  and  dormant  intelligence,  such  as  only 
a  common  faith,  a  rigid  ceremonial,  a  priesthood 
linked  in  one  vast  hierarchical  confederacy,  could 
effectively  control.  The  right  of  excommunicating 
sovereigns  for  moral  delinquencies  showed  the 
supremacy  of  the  Church  in  at  least  its  noblest 
aspect ;  even  though  the  implied  claim  of  the 
spiritual  over  the  temporal  power  was  as  in¬ 
defensible  as  vague.  The  attitude  of  a  Hilde¬ 
brand  and  an  Innocent,  and  even  of  an  Alexander 
and  a  Boniface  in  rebuking  injustice,  murder,  and 
lust,  is  full  of  moral  power;  rising,  in  its  appeal 
to  the  consciences  of  men,  to  the  dignity  of  the 
Jewish  Prophets.2  Men  might  seem  to  see  again 
an  Ambrose  closing  the  doors  of  the  Church  of 

1  Middle  Ages ,  II.  233,  12th  ed. 

2  Compare  Dean  rStanley,  Sermons  on  the  Bible ,  pp.  65,  66.  “  II  est 
vrai,”  says  Villemain,“  que  l’ambition  a  sou  vent  abuse  de  cet  exemple.” 
Tableau  de  VEloq.  Chret,,  p.  327.  De  Maistre  ( CEuvres ,  p.  370)  argues 
that  the  influence  of  tlie  medieval  Popes  was  in  the  main  a  spiritual, 
moral,  and  beneficial  one;  and  quotes  to  this  effect  Voltaire,  Essai, 
tom.  ii.,  c.  60,  65. 


Lect.  VII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


317 


Milan  against  the  blood-stained  hands  of  a  Theo¬ 
dosius  ;  or  a  Leo  arresting,  by  his  sole  unarmed 
authority,  the  licentious  advance  of  a  Grenseric  to 
the  sack  of  Rome.  But  the  assumption  of  the  Causes  of 

its  declen- 

power  of  the  sword  by  the  Vicegerent  of  Christ  sion, 
was  as  fatal  in  its  consequences  to  break  this  spell, 
as  it  was  without  foundation  in  the  doctrine  of 
Christ’s  Religion.  Who  could  doubt  but  that 
when  men  had  opportunity  to  examine  such 
monstrous  claims  there  would  come  that  secret 
working  of  the  leaven  of  truth,  which  would 
break  forth  into  spiritual  rebellion  against  the 
abuse  of  a  religious  despotism?  The  division  of 
interests  between  laity  and  clergy ;  the  price  paid 
for  the  vast  access  of  influence  secured  to  the 
Church  in  Monasticism  and  the  celibacy  of  its 
ministers,  was  destined  in  its  effects  to  rend  the  and  of  sub_ 

1  sequent 

institution  it  had  been  created  to  subserve.  Theo-  changes, 
logy  became  the  privileged  domain  of  the  clerical 
order,  their  instrument  of  power,  which  it  was  not 
in  human  nature  not  to  turn  into  a  weapon  of 
persecution.  The  secular  arm  tamely  executed 
the  censures  of  the  Church ;  while  Catholicism 
lapsed  into  a  theocracy,  siding  in  all  temporal 
matters  with  the  advocates  of  absolute  power. 

§  k.  I  have  already  alluded  to  the  subject  of  CorruP- 

3  u  J  J  tions  of 

corruptions  of  worship  and  doctrine.  The  creation  doctrine, 
of  Theology,  which  may  be  defined  to  be  a  scien¬ 
tific  or  orderly  statement  of  Divine  Truth,  was  the 


318 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VII. 


Rise  of 
Theology 
as  a 
science. 


Its  in¬ 
herent 
defects. 


growth  of  a  natural  development  of  reflection  upon 
the  revelations  to  the  human  mind,  contained  in 
the  words  of  Christ.  It  was  the  fruit  of  the  first 
five  centuries  of  the  Faith  in  East  and  West.  Its 
substitution  for  the  direct  teaching  of  Scripture 
was  the  historical  result  of  circumstances  attending1 
the  progress  and  spread  of  Christianity.  The 
Fathers  who  had  codified,  summarized,  or  expanded 
the  truths  of  our  holy  .Religion,  were  to  the  theo¬ 
logians  of  after-times  what  the  Apostles  and  the 
books  of  Holy  Writ  had  been  to  themselves.1  But 
with  this  difference.  It  was  impossible  in  those 
times,  and  in  that  stage  of  culture,  to  forge  again 
the  link  which  bound  the  utterances  of  the  earlier 
Fathers  of  the  Church  with  the  fresh  living 
springs  of  Christian  truth,  from  which  they  drew 
the  inspiration  of  their  teaching.  A  Scholastic 
Theology  was  the  exposition  of  the  thought  of  the 
age  upon  the  mysteries  of  the  Faith.  It  was  a 
poor  expression,  even  in  the  hands  of  the  devout er 
Mystics,  ot  the  mind  of  a  Chrysostom,  an  Origen, 
an  Augustine.  Little  by  little  the  ideas  of  men  on 
the  subjects  of  religious  inquiry  were  riveted  to 
traditional  stand-points,  and  made  to  run  within 


1  See  Guizot’s  remarks  in  Civ.  en  Fr .,  Leg.  xxix.  He  considers  the 
theology  of  the  Middle  Ages  to  have  commenced  in  the  ninth  century. 
Gibbon,  not  unjustly,  observes,  that  “for  the  five  hundred  years  after 
Christ  the  disciples  were  indulged  in  a  freer  latitude,  both  of  faith  and 
practice,  than  has  ever  been  allowed  in  succeeding  ages  ”  Dean  Meri- 
\ale,  Conv.  of  N,  Nations ,  p.  40,  says,  “the  fourth  century  places  the 
Religion  of  Christ  definitively  on  the  basis  of  a  Revealed  Theology.” 


Lect.  VII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


3*9 


appointed  channels.  Side  by  side  with  this  arti¬ 
ficial,  though  scientific  treatment  of  sacred  truths, 
was  working  in  practice  the  influence  of  legendary 
corruptions,1  constituting  a  sort  of  secondary  its  false 
Gospel,  and  ruling  with  all  the  force  of  poetical  ments, 
imagination  the  heart  and  belief  of  the  time. 

Every  Christian  man,  as  well  as  every  department 
of  the  Church,  had  his  interceding  Saint,  himself 
encompassed  with  miracle,  and  the  vehicle  of 
miraculous  intervention,  to  the  worshipper  as 
necessary  a  medium  of  spiritual  conception  and  of 
Divine  influence  as  the  ethers  and  entities  of  a 
corresponding  stage  in  physical  knowledge.  The  ^1dr^1ctts1' 
consequences  of  such  a  state  of  things,  in  modifying 
the  effects  of  the  simple  tenets  of  the  Gospel,  were 
doubtless  very  large  and  difficult  of  estimate.  The 
compromise  thus  represented  between  the  essential 
teachings  of  Christianity,  and  the  slow  advances 
of  the  barbaric  mind  towards  a  higher  point  of 
spiritual  culture,  affects  other  regions  of  the  Faith. 

The  prevailing  views  of  evil  Angels,  magic,  and 
witchcraft ;  of  Purgatory,  which,  at  the  beginning 
of  the  period  we  have  reviewed,  was,  to  the  mind 
of  Gregory  the  Great,2  but  a  probable  truth ;  but 


1  Compare  Milman,  Lat.  Chr.,  VI.  247,  who  styles  this  the  age  of 
“  the  mythic  literature  of  Christendom.” 

2  I  follow  the  expression  of  Dean  Milman,  Lat.  Chr .,  I.  442,  VI.  252. 
Gregory’s  words  are,  “  Sed  tamen  de  quibusdam  levibus  culpis  esse  ante 
judicium  purgatorius  ignis  credendus  est.” — Dial.,  IV.  39.  A  stronger 
passage  occurs  in  Ps.  iii ,  Pcenit.  svb  init.  Laud  ( Conference  with  Fisher , 
p.  296)  says :  “  As  for  St.  Augustine  he  said  and  unsaid  it,  and  at  the 


320 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VII. 


tending 
ultimately 
to  subvert 
the  autho¬ 
rity  of  the 
Church. 


The  Refor 
mation. 


was  soon  fraught  with  the  concomitants  in  practice 
of  absolution,  masses,  and  indulgences, 

Those  massy  keys  of  metal  twain, 

The  golden  opes,  the  iron  shuts  amain, 

borne  by  “the  Pilot  of  the  Galilsean  lake;”  and 
no  less  also  the  doctrines  of  mortal  and  venial 
sins,  of  councils  of  perfection,1  and  works  of  supere¬ 
rogation,  are  instances  of  similar  tendencies.  They 
lent,  indeed,  a  factitious  superficial  authority  to 
Medieval  Christianity2  in  its  rough  encounter  with 
the  temper  of  the  age ;  an  influence,  however,  more 
or  less  unreal,  since  uncongenial  with  the  true 
spirit  and  aims  of  the  Religion  itself ;  and  destined, 
accordingly,  to  pass  away  in  the  hour  of  account, 
when  “  the  fire  should  try  every  man’s  work,”  and 
“  the  day  should  declare  it  ”  of  what  sort  it  is. 

§  6.  We  know,  Brethren,  how  that  hour  came,  that 
day  of  darkness  and  gloominess,  of  “  clouds  and  of 
thick  darkness yet  “  as  the  morning  spread  upon 
the  mountains.”  For  though  terrible  with  “the 


last  left  it  doubtful :  which,  had  it  then  been  received  as  a  point  of 
faith,  he  durst  not  have  done.  Indeed,  then,  in  St.  Gregory  the  Great’s 
time,  in  the  beginning  of  the  sixth  age,  Purgatory  was  grown  to  some 
perfection.  For  S.  Gregory  himself  is  at  Scio,  it  was  but  at  Puto  a 
little  before.”  See  Bp.  Browne  on  the  Articles ,  pp.  500,  501. 

1  Consilia  Evangelica ,  as  distinguished  from  Prcecejota.  See  at 
length  Jeremy  Taylor,  Duct.  Dub.,  II.  xii. 

2  There  is  a  tendency  in  the  Positivist  School  to  exalt  the  doctrines 
and  institutions  of  medieval  Catholicism,  such  as  Purgatory,  Confession, 
Celibacy,  Papal  Supremacy ;  and  from  their  decline  to  infer  the  ulti¬ 
mate  dissolution  of  Christianity.  Comp.  Comte,  Phil.  Pos.,  Y.  269- 
348.  This  criticism,  however,  does  justice  to  the  secondary  benefits  of 
the  system,  flowing,  indeed,  from  the  tenets  of  the  Religion  itself. 


Lect.  VII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


321 


earthquakes  of  nations,”  it  still  rose  fraught  with 
hope.  It  was  a  movement  which  convulsed  the 
frame  of  Europe  ;  one  of  which,  it  may  well  be,  we 
have  as  yet  seen  but  the  beginning ;  for  already 
men  s  hearts  are  set  upon  a  second  Reformation. 

At  present  we  are  concerned  only  to  estimate  the  Nature  of 
nature  of  its  testimony  to  the  permanence  of  Chris-  denee  to 
tianity.  Has  it  rendered  the  prospects  of  our  manence 
Religion  more  hopeful  ?  Has  it  redressed  previous  tkni?y!S" 
shortcomings  ?  or  has  it,  as  in  the  view  of  some,1 
opened  a  vista  of  religious  disorganization  leading 
inevitably  to  a  negative  philosophy,  and  to  demo¬ 
cracy  in  Church  and  State?  The  Reformation  It  proved 
proved,  indeed,  many  things.  First,  certainly,  the  searching 
presence  of  corruptions  inherited  and  traditional  in  Tuthind 
the  framework  of  the  Faith  of  Christ ;  corruptions  mp^onsTf 
of  belief  and  practice  ;  of  the  substitution  of  man  [\\neT 
for  God  ;  of  the  Church  for  the  Gospel ;  of  sacer¬ 
dotalism  for  the  moral  sense,  as  the  last  religious 
appeal ;  of  salvation  by  positive  ordinances  and 
ritual  observances,  rather  than  by  personal  holiness 
and  implicit  belief  of  a  Faith  fast  losing  its  hold  on 
the  morality  and  true  dealing  of  the  time.2  All 
this  it  proved.  But  it  proved  equally  the  inherent 
vigour  of  a  Religion  which,  thus  in  the  course  of 

1  This  is  the  view  of  M.  Comte ;  developed  at  length  in  Phil.  Pos ., 

Vol.  V. 

2  Compare  Dean  Milman’s  sketch,  Lat.  Chr.,  VI.  379,  380,  of  the 
virtual  teaching  of  the  German  Mystics,  the  “  .Reformers  before  the 
Reformation.” 


Y 


322  THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VII. 

ages,  could  purify  itself  like  running  water,  from 
the  errors  and  defilements  of  the  past :  that  it  is  no 
system  which  must  lean  always  on  ignorance, 
Th\s  a  despotism,  or  craft.1  The  great  hope  for  Chris- 
hopeful  tianity,  the  standing  witness  of  its  perpetuity 

symptom.  J  .  ..  r* 

and  truth,  must  lie  always  m  this  possibility  oi 
reconstruction,  this  return  upon  itself ;  in  this  ten¬ 
dency  and  capacity  of  expelling  all  foreign  and 
unhealthy  matters,  not  of  kin  with  the  true  ele¬ 
ments  of  the  Faith  of  Jesus  Christ.  But  the  Refor¬ 
mation,  impartially  examined,  proves  likewise  that 
the  history  of  the  Western  Church  prepared  for 
itself  the  test  which  was  then  applied,  and  which 
it  is  im-  it  lias  successfully  survived.  However  dormant, 
that  this  there  lay  within  its  doctrines  and  institutions  that 

crisis  arose  J  . 

out  of  the  appeal  to  reason  and  to  the  religious  conscience 

nature  and  1  y  - 

history  of  which,  in  fact,  produced  those  effects.  In  the 

the  reli-  i 

gion.  Monasteries,  Schools,  and  Universities,2  themselves 
the  creations  and  nurselings  of  the  Faith  of  Christ, 
arose  slowly,  yet  surely,  that  spirit  of  inquiry ;  that 
love  of  reality  and  truth ;  that  consciousness  of 
spiritual  wrong,  and  of  a  higher  law  than  the  con¬ 
straint  of  existing  practice  ;  which,  slowly  ripening, 


1  Comp.  Isaac  Taylor  (IJist.  of  Enthus.,  p.  267). 

2  See  Guizot,  Civ.  en  Fr.,  Lep.  v.,  vi.  Dean  Milman  ( Lcit .  Chr.,  V. 
485-8)  shows  the  relations  of  the  Monasteries  to  the  Universities.  Mr. 
Lecky  (II.  E.  M.)  remarks  too  narrowly  that  “it  was  not  till  the 
education  of  Europe  passed  from  the  Monasteries  to  the  Universities, 
not  till  Mahommedan  science  and  classical  free-thought  and  industrial 
independence  broke  the  sceptre  of  the  Church,  that  the  intellectual 
revival  of  Europe  begins.” 


Lect.  VII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


323 


contained  the  pledge  of  future  amendment  and  of 
continuous  progress.  From  knowledge  alone, 
however  improved  and  matured,  the  Reformation 
could  never  have  taken  its  rise.1  But  when  once 
spiritual  conviction  and  enthusiasm  were  enlisted 
on  the  side  of  reflection  and  inquiry,  the  result 
could  be  no  longer  doubtful  or  precarious. 

§  7.  It  is  ever  the  misfortune  of  human  effort,  Shortcom- 
whether  in  politics  or  religion,  that  the  movements  Reformat 
it  originates  must  needs  reflect  the  passions,  weak-  tlon’ 
nesses,  and  shortcomings  of  their  authors  and  their 
times.  The  good  which  a  generous  enthusiasm  pro¬ 
mises  to  itself, is  never  altogether  realized.  The  evils 
expected  or  exaggerated  by  unfavourable  critics 
remain  at  least  in  part  to  mar  the  benefits  which, 
on  the  whole,  ensue.  I  am  not  concerned  to  strike  a 
balance  between  the  estimates  of  those  who  see  in  the 
theological  results  of  the  Reformation  nothing  but 
good  or  unmixed  evil.  It  is  time  that  the  violent  Different 
and  unintelligent  antagonism  between  Catholicism  of  its  true 
and  Protestantism,  unworthy  of  the  enlightenment cha,acter' 
of  our  times,  and  arising  simply  from  traditional 

1  See  Gieseler’s  excellent  remarks,  V.  202,  ed.  Clark.  This  is  a  truer 
view  than  with  Mr.  Lecky  (ff.  Rat.,  I.  284)  to  refer  the  causes  of  the 
Reformation  to  an  increased  acquaintance  with  Latin  classics  and  Greek 
philosophy.  Dr.  Ullmann  well  observes  ( Reformers  before  the  Reforma¬ 
tion,  II.  3,  ed.  Clark),  On  only  one  side  did  philosophy  contribute  to 
the  revival  of  Chiistian  piety  and  knowledge.  We  allude  to  Platonism, 
which,  being  naturally  akin  to  the  Gospel,  now  entered  into  league  with 
the  new  and  living  theology,  and  rose  with  fresh  vigour  against  the 
Aristotelianism  of  the  Schoolmen.”  Luther  and  Melancthon  were 
however,  on  opposite  sides  in  this  matter  ;  at  least  after  1529. 

Y  2 


324 


[Lect.  VII. 


THE  PERMANENCE 


causes,  should  give  way  before  a  calmer,  a  more 
discerning,  a  more  comprehensive  analysis.  I 
desire  only  to  insist  on  facts  now  generally  ad¬ 
mitted  by  impartial  investigators.  The  services  of 
Medieval  Catholicism  should,  as  we  have  seen,  be 
no  longer  ignored.  Neither  must  its  corruptions  be 
denied.1  The  state  of  the  Church  of  Christ  in  the 
fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries  was  such  as  to 


Undoubt¬ 
edly  in¬ 
evitable  as 
a  practical 
reform, 


but  only 
possible 
through  a 
purgation 
of  doc¬ 
trine. 


demand  renovation  both  in  its  theory  and  in  its 
practice.  Let  us  think  only  of  its  immorality,  its 
simony,  its  superstitions.  We  have  already  seen 
that  the  evils  which  then  afflicted  Religion  were  in 
many  ways  the  historical  consequences  of  the  cir¬ 
cumstances  under  which  Christianity  had  taken 
possession  of  the  world ;  the  treasure  of  a  Divine 
Faith  poured  into  earthen  vessels.  These  evils  had 
grown  with  the  growth  of  the  Church:  in  some 
doctrinal  accretions  they  touched  its  vitality  nearly ; 
yet  without  being  inherent  in  the  essential  prin¬ 
ciples  of  the  teachings  of  Christ.  Their  removal  or 
amendment  could  be  effected  only  by  practical 
reforms  of  a  nature  to  eradicate  the  immorality  of 
the  times,  more  especially  in  the  case  of  the  clergy. 
But  these  reforms  depended  ultimately  for  their 
authoritative  reception  on  a  reconstitution  of  Chris- 

i  Comp.  Dollinger,  The  Church  and  Churches,  Introd.;  andLectt.  on 
Re-union  of  the  Churches.  The  necessity  of  the  Reformation  is  sufficiently 
shown  by  the  impotence  of  the  General  Councils  of  the  fifteenth  cen¬ 
tury  to  abolish  abuses.  The  episcopal  system  was  wholly  subject  to 
Rapal  domination;  a  fact  which  told  unhappily  on  the  course  of  the 
subsequent  movements. 


Lect.  VII.]  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  325 


tian  doctrine.  Had  the  Reformation  been  only  a 
moral  advance  ;l  an  improvement  of  life  and  man¬ 
ners  ;  as  some  have  preferred  to  regard  it,  and  as  at 
its  outset  it  undoubtedly  seemed  to  its  precursors ; 
practical  changes  would  have  sufficed.  It  was, 
however,  not  so ;  the  causes  ol  the  movement  lay 
deeper  ;  the  spiritual  element  of  disturbance  was  of 
more  account  than  the  moral ;  and  in  this  fact  and 


in  its  gradual  superiority  over  all  opposition  lies 
the  guarantee  of  continuous  religious  regeneration, 
and  so  of  the  permanence  itself  of  Christianity. 

Had  the  results  of  the  Reformation  been  solely  of  a  Hence 

a  truly 

moral  character,  the  ultimate  interests  of  the  Reh  -  spiritual 

.  .  .  ,  ,  .  *n  i  movement, 

gion  of  Christ  might  indeed  nave  been  imperilled. 

The  chief  cause  of  the  existing  corruption  lay  in 
the  distortion  of  doctrine  through  human  additions 
and  human  institutions.  Where,  then,  stood  the 
remedy,  and  what  led  to  its  adoption  ?  It  consisted 
in  a  re-examination  of  the  Religion  itself ;  of  the 
traditional  developments  and  actually  existing 
system  by  the  moral  and  by  the  spiritual  sense  of 
the  age.  If  it  survived  the  test,  it  was  once  more  testing  the 

0  persis¬ 

tency  of 

1  The  moral  movement  which  preceded  the  actual  outburst  of  the  tpe  p,-jn_ 
Reformation  (which  may  be  considered  to  have  formally  commenced  ciples  of 
with  the  Papal  Bull,  Exsurge  Domine  (June  15,  1520),  rejecting  Chris- 
Luther’s  propositions  and  excommunicating  him  ;)  can  hardly  be  dis-  u  y‘ 
tinguished  from  the  religious  revival  which  accompanied  it.  This 
exhibited  itself  in  simple  apostolical  preaching ;  in  fraternities  for  the 
encouragement  of  piety  and  good  works,  for  the  circulation  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  the  like.  Hagenbach  (  Vorlesungen,  I.  18)  points  out 
the  importance  of  assigning  an  historical  commencement  to  the  Reforma- 
tion.  This  he  identifies  with  Luther’s  Thesis  at  Wittenberg  (1517). 


326 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VII. 


replaced  in  its  native  purity  and  dignity,  as  the 
fulfilment  and  crown  of  the  aspirations  of  the  soul 
of  man.  Such,  accordingly,  was  the  character  of 
the  witness  rendered  by  this,  the  most  important 
religious  crisis  in  modern  history,  to  the  per- 

Spirituai  petuity  of  the  Christian  Faith.  The  Christianity  of 

declension  ...  ^ 

of  Cathoii-  Catholicism  had  in  the  main  become,  (not  of  course 

eism.  .  #  v 

to  all,  or  indeed  to  the  highest  natures,)  an  objec¬ 
tive  law,  an  external  ordinance,  a  compendium  of 
statutes,1  as  well  in  spiritual  beliefs  as  on  its  moral 
side.  Good  and  wholesome  influences  were  still 
abiding  in  it,  but  trammelled  and  overlaid  by 
secular  corruptions.  There  was  needed,  then,  a  re¬ 
sumption  of  its  first  claims  on  man’s  intelligence 
and  spiritual  apprehension.  The  .Religion  must  be 
seen  again  to  be  what  it  really  is :  not  a  set  of  for¬ 
mula?  for  action  or  belief;2  not  a  visible  Theocracy 
implicated  and  involved  in  political  embarrassments 
by  an  assumption  of  temporal  power ;  but  rather 
a  personal  instinct  of  love  and  gratitude,3  based, 
indeed,  on  eternal  facts  of  human  interest ;  the  out- 

1  Comp.  Ullmann,  u.  s.,  II.  G17 ;  or,  as  M.  Comte  has  happily  ex¬ 
pressed  it,  “  too  much  of  an  institution,  too  little  of  a  spirit.”  It 
encouraged  learning,  hut  sacerdotally ;  industry,  hut  through  guilds ; 
chivalry,  through  military  orders,  &c. 

“  Protestantism,  as  compared  with  the  other  two  great  Church  par¬ 
ties  of  Christendom,  rests  content  neither  with  a  mere  intellectual 
appropriation  of  Christianity,  whether  in  a  speculative  form  or  in  a 
recollective  form  that  faces  a  traditional  doctrine  ;  nor  with  a  mere 
subjection  oi  the  will  to  a  dogmatic  or  even  practical  Church  law.” — 
Dorner,  Hist,  of  Prot.  Th.,  I.  5,  ed.  Clark. 

3  See  Ullmann,  Reformers,  II.  618. 


Lect.  VII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


327 


come  of  a  living  faith,  acting  powerfully  to  regene¬ 
rate  and  sanctify  man’s  heart,  transforming,  as  a 
new  Divine  element  of  life,  the  character  of  indi¬ 
viduals  and  nations.  No  doubt,  this  true  Christian  Real  im- 

port  of  th 

spirit  manifests  itself  as  a  moral  law  and  doctrine  m  Reforma- 
agreement  with  its  nature.  But  its  appeal  is  to  a 
higher  consciousness,  both  as  to  Reconciliation  with 
God  and  Sanctification,  than  belongs  to  the  perform¬ 
ance  of  moral  duties ;  and  rests  more  truly  on  an 
assurance  of  facts  which  are  bound  up  with  the 
mysteries  of  the  Faith. 

Such  was  the  real  import  of  a  struggle  which  had 
been  maturing  through  many  generations.  Its  ^s^fs. 
incidents  have  often  been  treated  as  though  they  toricai 

0  y  character 

were  the  simple  effects  of  circumstance.  In  this 
view 

Gospel  light  first  streamed  from  Boleyn’s  eyes. 

Men  fought,  as  it  appeared,  for  a  mere  dogma  :l 
and  one,  too,  on  which  the  more  moderate  thinkers 
on  either  side  were  practically  agreed.  But  the 
true  issues  of  the  conflict  lay  deep  in  the  constitu- 

1  Luther’s  language  as  to  Justification  by  Faith  is  well  known.  It 
is  the  “  articulus  stantis  et  cadentis  ecclesia3.  De  hoc  articulo  cedere, 
aut  aliquid  contra  ilium  largiri  nemo  piorum  potest,  etiamsi  ccelum  et 
terra  et  omnia  corruant.  Nam  in  hoc  articulo  sita  sunt  omnia,  quse 
contra  diabolum  et  mundum  universum  in  tota  vita  nostra  testamur  et 
agimus.”  See  Art.  Smalc.  305,  and  Form.  Concordia,  683.  Yet  no 
attempt  at  a  definition  of  this  article  of  faith  had  descended  from  the 
Fathers.  Melancthon,  Bucer,  and  others,  moderated  the  expressions  of 
Luther.  The  Tridentine  Fathers  considered  that  all  Luther’s  errors 
were  based  on  his  view  of  Justification. —  Sarpi,  Hist.,  II.  p.  178.  See 
Bp.  Browne  on  the  XXXIX.  Articles,  p.  285.  On  the  first  reception  of 
the  doctrine  by  the  Catholics  of  Italy,  see  Banke,  Topes,  II.  i.  1. 


328 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VII. 

tion  of  human  nature,  and  involved  the  destinies 
of  Christianity  itself.  A  fresh  recognition  of  the 
work  of  Christ  for  man,  obscured  as  to  its  spiritual 
efficacy  by  a  blank  ceremonial  belief,  was  neces¬ 
sary  to  secure  the  renewing  of  a  right  relation 
and nar-  between  Himself  aud  His  Church,  “the  blessed 

rowed. 

company  of  all  faithful  souls.”  A  type  of  such 
a  doctrinal  recognition  was  sought  and  found  in 
Justification  by  Faith  only;1  and  belief  in  it  was 
strengthened,  if  not  suggested,  by  an  examination 

resuksTthe  °f  the  witness  of  Holy  Writ.  Its  application  in 
most  in-  practice  involved  differences,  not  indeed  in  them- 

selves  insurmountable;  yet  which  have  hitherto 
proved  fruitful  of  dissension  and  schism.  Such  are 
a  denial  of  sacerdotal  mediation  ;  a  low  estimate 
of  ecclesiastical  authority ;  a  widely  varying  inter- 
pretation  of  the  Sacraments  of  the  Gfospel ;  a  wholly 
altered  i  elation  to  the  historical  Church  of  Christen¬ 
dom.  To  these  must  be  added,  as  fresh  sources  of 
embarrassment,  the  admixture  of  secular  interests ; 
together  with  imperfections  of  knowledge  and 
character  on  the  part  of  the  leading*  Reformers  2 

1  More  properly,  Fidcs  sola  justificat;  sed  fides  non  est  solitaria; 
i.  e.  m  the  words  of  Augustine  ( Be  Fid.  et  0_p.,  c.  xiv.),  “  sequuntur 
opera  bona  justificatum  :  non  prascedunt  justificandum.” 

Luther,”  says  Chillingworth  ( Pel .  Prof.,  VI.  73),  “was  a  man  of 
a  vehement  spirit,  and  very  often  what  he  took  in  hand  he  did  not  do 
it,  but  overdodt.  He  that  will  justify  all  his  speeches,  especially  such 
ns  he  wrote  in  heat  of  opposition,  I  believe  will  have  work  enough.” 
See  Sir  W.  Hamilton’s  strictures  ( Discussions ,  491-506).  “If  there 
have  been  any  wilful  and  gross  errors,  not  so  much  in  opinion  as  in 
fact  (sacrilege  too  often  pretending  to  reform  superstition),  that  is  the 
crime  of  the  Reformers,  not  of  the  Reformation ;  and  they  are  lon^ 


Lect.  VII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


329 


§  8.  The  Reformation,  then,  can  only  he  con-  This  ana- 

>2  7  m  '  lysis  evi- 

sidered  a  fresh  conception  of  the  faith  and  doctrine  dent  from 

L  the  course 

of  the  Gospel,  a  regeneration  of  the  Christian  life  of  the 
and  spirit ;  the  fruit,  indeed,  of  the  history  ot  the 
Church,  with  its  attendant  corruptions  of  letter 
and  spirit,  practice  and  doctrine,  yet  in  effect  a 
return  to  the  primary  teaching  of  Christianity.  It 
contained,  accordingly,  distinct  elements  wrought 
out  by  different  agencies,  by  the  men  of  thought 
and  the  men  of  purpose.  The  first  furnished,  out 
of  an  advance  in  Scriptural  knowledge1  due  in 
part  to  the  revival  of  classical  learning,  those 
first  principles  of  doctrine  which  were  the  grounds 
of  action  to  the  practical  reformers  of  existing 
abuses.  On  these  last  attention  has  often  nearly 
wholly,  but  not  unnaturally,  turned.  As  the  The,  Prac" 

«/  7  47  tical  aspect 

prime  agents,  the  martyrs  and  confessors  of  the  of  the  Re- 

1  o  7  formation 

has  been 

since  gone  to  God  to  answer  it ;  to  Whom  I  leave  them.” — Laud,  the  most 
Confer .,  xxiv.  5.  In  the  words  of  Leibnitz,  “  Ce  sont  les  defauts  des  studied, 
homines,  et  non  pas  ceux  des  dogmes.”  The  fanaticism  of  the  Anabap¬ 
tists  belongs,  as  Dorner  has  shown,  not  to  the  principles  of  the  Reforma¬ 
tion  carried  to  excess,  but  rather  to  the  social  and  religious  maladies  of 
the  pre-Reformation  period.  See  some  good  remarks  of  Hallam,  Lit.  of 
E.,  I.  371,  on  the  passions  which  were  instrumental  in  the  Reformation, 
and  Dean  Hook,  Lives ,  New  Ser.,  I.  20. 

1  Such,  e.  (j . ,  was  Nicolaus  Lyranus,  a  Franciscan  monk,  who  as  early 
as  1330  completed  his  Postillce  perpetuce.  It  was  of  this  exposition  it 
was  said : — 

Si  Lyra  non  lyrasset 
Lutherus  non  saltasset. 

See  Mosheim,  II.  644.  On  the  Biblical  factor  in  the  Reformation, 
noticeable  as  early  as  the  Waldenses,  and  traceable  through  Wycliffe 
(1380)  and  the  various  vernacular  translations  of  tbc  Bible  in  the  four¬ 
teenth  and  fifteenth  centuries,  see  Dorner,  u.  s.,  I.  63,  441.  Lastly,  the 
labours  of  Reuchlin,  Erasmus,  &c.,  must  be  taken  into  account. 


330 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VII. 


Its  true 
import¬ 
ance  as  a 
crisis  of 
belief. 


movement,  they  have^  enlisted  sympathy  and  won 
admiration.  Doubtless  at  such  crises  decision  and 
self-sacrifice  are  of  more  apparent  value  than  the 
results  of  slow  and  just  reflection.  Yet,  on  looking 
back,  it  is  now  sufficiently  clear  that  the  doctrines 
for  which  men  died,  the  contributions  of  patient 
thought  and  learning,1  form  the  abiding  results  of 
this  great  epoch  in  religion,  and  were  the  true 
preparation  for  it.  If,  then,  this  view  be  correct, 
the  very  essence  of  the  Reformation  lay,  not  in 
any  practical  correction  of  abuses,  nor  in  a  moral 
advance,  but  in  its  theology  and  belief.  It  has 
been  called  the  reaction  of  Christianity,  as  a  teach¬ 
ing  of  the  Gospel,2  against  Christianity,  as  a  de¬ 
claration  of  Divine  Law.  It  was,  indeed,  a  free 
doctrine  of  grace  and  faith,  of  love  and  spirit, 
leading  to  the  fulfilment  of  legal  and  moral  righ¬ 
teousness,  as  a  prompting  of  the  heart  restored 
to  fresh  union  with  the  God  of  its  salvation,  and 
conscious  of  its  own  restoration;3  ideas  once 

1  Such  were  the  labours  of  the  Reformers  before  the  Reformation, 
Johann  von  Goch,  Johann  Wessel,  who  held  explicitly  the  doctrine  of 
justifying  faith,  Gerhard  Groot,  Jacob  von  Jiiterbock,  &c.  Of  Wessel 
Luther  said :  “  If  I  had  read  Wessel  first,  mine  adversaries  might  have 

imagined  that  Luther  had  taken  everything  from  Wessel.” _ Werke  ed 

Walch,  xiv.  220.  He  also  claimed  kindred  with  the  efforts  of*  the 
earlier  Mystics,  Tauler,  Eckhart,  and  the  Friends  of  God. 

2  It  was  a  saying  of  Luther’s,  that  “  the  law  and  the  Gospel  are 
as  far  apart  from  one  another  as  heaven  and  earth.” 

3  Luther  thus  distinguishes  between  fides,fidutia,  and  certitudo  salutis. 
Cf.  Dorner,  I.  149,  230,  who  well  remarks  on  the  fruitfulness  of  this 
principle  from  a  scientific  or  philosophic  point  of  view,  as  regards  the 
subsequent  history  of  Protestantism  ;  while  the  Greek  and  Roman 


Lect.  VII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


331 


familiar  to  the  Christian  mind,1  and  at  no  time 
excluded  from  its  potential  teaching,  yet  which 
had  long  been  disused  or  misapplied.  The  prin¬ 
ciples  it  has  secured  to  mankind  are  those  of  faith, 
of  a  true  spiritualism,  of  individual  accountability 
for  belief  and  practice,  as  inherent  elements  of  our 
common  Religion.  These  are  the  pledges  which  it  Full  of 
has  supplied  to  Christianity  of  its  future  share  in  efficacy, 
the  advance  of  human  civilization.  What  has 
been  called  the  principle  of  private  judgment  is,  in 
truth,  an  element  of  indefinite,  though  not  as  is 
often  urged,  of  unrestricted  progress.  It  is  true 
that  the  Reformation  assumed  essentially  the 
obligation  of  a  continual  purifying  and  perfecting 
alike  of  practice  and  doctrine,2  of  the  Church  and  Not  in- 

1  #  #  .  definite. 

of  the  world,  of  Religion  and  of  Science.  And  this 
is  a  principle  of  vital  progress.  But,  then,  this 
advance  is  always  to  be  made  upon  the  foundation 

Churches  in  no  way  insist  upon  personal  assurance.  Calvin  (Inst.,  III. 
ii.  6)  says :  “  Cardo  fidei  in  eo  vertitur,  ut  promissiones  intus  amplec- 
tendo  nostras  faciamus.” 

1  Comp.  Ep.  ad  Diogn.  c.  xii.  vHr<o  aoi  Kcipbla  yvaxris  •  £0077  \6yos 
a\r]dr]s,  x^povpevos.  Under  Catholicism  the  personal  yearning  after  salva¬ 
tion  and  closer  communion  with  God,  had  too  often  to  find  refuge  in 
conventual  retirement.  We  have  already  noticed  the  intrinsic  selfish¬ 
ness  which  lay  at  the  root  of  this  system. 

2  “  In  our  own  times  there  is  a  constant  disposition  to  consider  the  liberty 
of  the  Reformation  as  an  abstract  form ;  to  fancy  that  any  imaginable 
substance  may  be  put  into  it ;  and  hence  to  conceive  Protestantism  as 
implying  a  principle  of  progress  absolutely  unrestricted,  and  it  matters 
not  whether  beyond  the  pale  of  Christianity,  or  even  in  direct  opposi¬ 
tion  to  it.  No  such  tenet  has  any  foundation  upon  the  idea  of  liberty 
as  conceived  by  the  Reformers  and  their  predecessors/’ — Ullmann, 
Reformers ,  I.  xviii. 


332 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VII. 


1'he  Re¬ 
formation 
presents 
no  break 
in  the  con 
tinuity  of 
Chris¬ 
tianity  as 
a  system. 


No  phase 
of  nega¬ 
tion. 


that  is  already  laid,  the  testimony  of  the  Gospel, 
and  the  rule  of  strictly  primitive  tradition.1 

§  9.  It  is  further  evident  that  the  Reformation, 
rightly  considered,  presents  no  interruption  of  the 
-  continuity  of  human  affairs,2  no  founding  over 
again  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  In  its  truest  and 
best  development  there  was  no  breaking  with  the 
past.  It  called  for  no  belief  that  the  Church  had 
been  at  any  time  wholly  forsaken  by  the  Spirit  of 
her  Lord,  or  disinherited  of  His  promises.  It 
never  renounced  the  historical  basis  of  Christianity. 
It  was  no  mere  phase  of  negation  or  of  destruction, 
but  rather  a  reconstruction  ;  a  transition  apparently 
spontaneous  from  beliefs,  themselves  transitional 
and  relative  to  new  modes  of  religious  thought 
and  belief,  limited  by  the  canons  of  Apostolic 
teaching.  The  very  idea  of  a  Re-formation  implies 
a  return  to  a  standard  or  point  of  outset  already 
known  and  fixed.3  It  is  a  spiritual  re-edification  ; 
and,  as  such,  a  recall  to  primitive  Christianity, 
to  the  words  and  examples  of  Christ.  For  Chris- 


Comp.  the  concluding  declaration  of  the  Confession  of  Augsburg  • 
lan turn  ea  recitata  sunt  qua3  videbantur  necessario  dicenda  esse,  ut 
mtelligi  possit  in  doctrina  ac  cajremoniis,  apud  nos  nihil  esse  receptum 
contra  Scripturam  aut  Ecclesiam  Catholicam.”— Syllog.  Con/.,  pp.  158, 
232. 


2  ‘‘  Protestantism  in  all  its  movements  and  antitheses  preserved  the 

steadiness  or  continuity  of  a  historical  and  growing  formation.” _ Corner, 

Hist.  Prot.  Th .,  I.  9,  and  the  excellent  remarks  in  p.  50.  “  The 
Reformation  would  lose  its  historical  basis  and  connection,  if,  in  order  to 
furnish  a  triumphant  justification  of  it,  we  were  to  see  nothing  but 
darkness  before  it.” 

3  Gal.  i.  7,  8,  9.  For  there  cannot  be  two  Gospels. 


Lect.  VII.] 


333 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

tianity  itself  was  at  the  beginning  a  purely  spiritual  un- 
religion,  a  strong  invincible  conviction  of  renewed  reaction, 
individual  fellowship  with  a  merciful  God  and 
Father,  effected  by  the  Incarnation  and  Sacrifice  of 
His  Son.  It  was  no  less  as  the  offspring  and  pro¬ 
duct  of  this  conviction  in  the  believer  ;  or,  in  other 
words,  of  this  living  faith,  a  life  of  love  and  spon¬ 
taneous  morality.1  Its  body  is,  indeed,  the  Church 
animated  ever  by  the  vital  presence  of  Christ  and 
of  His  Spirit,  yet  liable  to  admixture  and  deteriora¬ 
tion,  subject  to  the  conditions  of  earthly  things, 
the  results  of  time  and  succession,  ot  political  issues, 
and  historical  development.  The  balance  of  com-  The 
plementary  doctrines  may,  in  the'  course  of  affairs,  doctrine 
become  overthrown,  without,  however,  those  doc¬ 
trines  being  severally  contradicted  or  lost ;  such, 
for  example,  as  the  parallelism  of  a  dogma  of 
Justification  with  that  of  Sanctification  ;  of  Christ’s 
Atonement  with  the  need  of  personal  holiness ;  of 
subjective  faith  with  objective  righteousness;  of 
grace  with  works ;  of  positive  commands  with  moral 
obligations;  of  external  symbolism  with  a  living 
consciousness  of  its  significance ;  of  ecclesiastical 
constitution  with  spiritual  worship.  This  balance  its^contn- 
the  Reformation  sought  to  restore.  It  has  left  the  future 

#  career  oi 

some  truths  clearly  defined  as  its  contribution  to  chris- 

,  .  i  >  tianity, 

future  ages  of  the  Church,  more  especially  mans 
need  of  individual  regeneration  ;  that  this  cannot 

1  Compare  Ullmann,  Reformers ,  I.  p.  4. 


334 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VII. 


be  wrought  out  by  natural  means  alone ;  that  by  a 
Divine  Revelation,  and  in  a  Divine  relation  with 
the  creature  of  an  abiding  and  universal  character, 
man’s  salvation  is  secured.  “  Thou  wilt  keep  him 
in  perfect  peace,  whose  mind  is  stayed  upon 
Thee.” 

§  io.  Thus,  if  Christianity  be  indeed  the  “salt 
of  the  earth,5’1  it  must  needs  be  purgative,  and  is 
ever  tending  to  throw  off  the  accumulations  of 
worldly  impurity ;  an  impurity  which  reaches  to 
the  lowering  of  heavenly  doctrines,  as  well  as  to 
the  marring  of  their  realization  in  practice.  The 
{aJ2z-St~  Christian  idea,  the  imitation  of  Christ,  made  pos- 
ment-  sible  by  the  Incarnation  of  the  Word,  will  always, 
in  a  manner,  protest  against  the  defects  inherent 
and  immanent  in  its  manifestation  in  the  world.2 
At  varying  epochs  this  antagonism  could  not  but 
show  itself  forth.  The  conflicts  to  which  all 
human  progress  seems  liable,  its  corruptions,  its 
hindrances,  must  needs  attend  equally  the  action 
of  Christianity  upon  mankind.  Yet  “  a  little 
leaven  leaveneth  the  whole  lump.”  And  this  self- 

1  “  It  was  necessary  that  the  Gospel,  which  had  once  already  proved 
the  preserving  salt  for  the  world,  where  putrefaction  had  begun,  should 
again  penetrate  in  its  original  purity,  power,  and  leavening  influence, 
into  the  hearts  and  lives  of  the  people.” — Dorner,  I.  40. 

Ihe  1  lotestants  did  not  get  that  name  by  protesting  against  the 
Church  of  Rome,  hut  by  protesting  (and  that  when  nothing  else  would 
scivc)  against  her  enors  and  superstitions.” — Laud,  Cfonf .  with  F.  f 
xxi.  3 :  viz.  at  Speier,  April  16,  1529 ;  where  it  had  been  decreed 

by  the  Papal  paity,  contra  novatores,  ut  omnia  in  integrum  resti- 
tuantur.” 


Lect.  VII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


335 


quickening,  self-renewing  process  will  not  be 
wanting  even  to  the  end,  while  there  remains 
among  men  the  opposition  between  truth  and 
error,  between  holiness  and  sin,  between  the  king¬ 
dom  of  God  and  the  kingdoms  of  the  world. 


LECTURE  VIII. 

THE  PERMANENCE  OF  CHRISTIANITY  INFERRED 
FROM  ITS  MISSIONARY  CHARACTER  AND 
PRESENT  STANDING. 


“  Ex  quo  intelligimus  Ecclesiam  usque  ad  finem  mundi  coucuti  quidem 
persecutionibus,  sed  nequaquam  posse  subverti :  tentari,  non  superari. 
Et  hoc  fiet,  quia  Dominus  Deus  Omnipotens,  sive  Dominus  Deus  ejus, 
id  est,  Ecclesiae,  se  facturum  esse  pollicitus  est :  Cujus  promissio  lex 
naturse  est.” — Hieron.,  Comment  in  Amos,  sub  fin. 

“  Is  it  possible  to  expect  a  further  and  more  perfect  manifestation  of 
Religion,  as  we  may  expect  a  further  and  more  perfect  manifestation  of 
Art,  or  Science,  or  Philosophy  ?  No.  Never,  either  in  our  days  or  in 
the  remotest  future,  can  any  religious  progress  hope  to  rival  the  gigantic 
step  which  humanity  made  through  the  revolution  effected  by  Christ.” 
— Strauss,  Life  of  Christy  Yol.  II.  p.  49,  3rd  ed. 


Z 


LECTURE  VIII. 


“  Lo  !  Iam  with  you  alway  j  eve?i  unto  the  end  of  the  world.” — 

$9att.  jcjclmt.  20. 

5  i.  r  |  ^HERE  is  a  growing  tendency  to  regard  T.endenc.y 

5  I  &  &  j  o  of  opposite 

the  results  of  the  Reformation  in  two  °/ 

the  Refor- 

very  opposite  aspects.  It  has  been  assailed  as  the  nation  on 

^  A  x  x  '  the  present 

commencement  of  an  era  of  unbelief,  of  unsettle-  estimate  of 

the  Chris- 

ment  of  all  authoritative  teaching ;  as  the  cause  of  tian  re- 
all  subsequent  fluctuations  of  opinion  on  religious 
subjects.1  Its  historical  course  has  been  held  up  as 
a  warning ;  as  exhibiting  the  Nemesis  of  a  revolt 
from  traditional  doctrine.  Strange  to  say,  the 
Romanist  and  the  disciple  of  Comte,  though  from 
very  opposite  suggestions,  are  of  one  opinion  as  to 
the  demerits  of  Protestantism.  While  the  former 
eyes  it  with  sternness,  or,  at  best,  with  compassion, 
as  the  outcome  of  human  waywardness  and  re¬ 
bellion  ;  the  latter  regards  it  only  with  philoso¬ 
phical  contempt.2  To  him  it  is  an  interruption,  a  view  of 

1  Gibbon  (VII.  61)  struck  the  first  chord  of  this  ill-omened  pre-  tivists 
diction.  “  The  friends  of  Christianity  are  alarmed  at  the  boundless 
impulse  of  inquiry  and  scepticism &c.  He  here  appears  in  the  un¬ 
wonted  garb  of  “  the  candid  friend  ”  of  the  Religion  of  Christ.  “  Le 
Protestantisme  le  grand  reveil  chretien,”  says  M.  Renan  more  truly. 

2  Comte  notes  as  marks  of  the  religious  disorganization  of  the  age, 
the  resistance  of  Catholicism  to  intellectual  emancipation,  and  the  secu¬ 
larization  of  the  ruling  classes.  These  are  the  results  of  Protestantism, 
i.  e.  of  the  right  of  private  judgment,  which  leads  inevitably  to  Demo¬ 
cracy  in  Church  and  State,  to  a  negative  philosophy,  attacking  first 

z  2 


340 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 


of  the 
Rational¬ 
istic 
School. 


stumbling-block,  a  logical  inconsequence,  an  issue 
of  mental  anarchy,  a  period  of  transition,  of  con¬ 
fusion,  of  necessary  evil,  fraught  with  social  and 
political  disturbance.  A  s  the  introduction  to  after¬ 
changes;  the  pioneer  of  Positivism ;  a  main  agency 
in  dissolving  the  older  military  and  hierarchical 
organizations ;  the  accompaniment  of  an  era  of 
free,  metaphysical  discussion ;  it  might,  one  would 
have  thought,  have  been  entitled  to  passing  re¬ 
spect.  This  is  not,  it  seems,  to  be  accorded.  But 
there  is  also  another  view  of  this  great  historical 
movement,  one  which  has  affected  so  largely  and 
so  permanently  the  condition  and  fortunes  of 
Europe;  which  is  now  becoming  popular.  The 
Reformation  is  looked  on  as  the  companion,  and 
as  itself  the  result,  if  not  the  precursor,  of  a  spirit 


religious  truth,  while  all  other  becomes  a  lesser  and  included  result. 
He  divides  Protestantism  into  a.  Lutheranism,  which  is  really  an  attack 
on  Catholic  discipline,  the  dogmatic  differences  being  slight :  b.  Cal¬ 
vinism,  an  assault  on  Catholic  organization  or  hierarchy,  of  the  most 
powerful  kind:  c.  Socinianism,  a  dogmatic  revolution  of  the  deepest 
character,  being  a  protest  in  favour  of  Monotheism.  See  Phil.  Pos.,  V. 
C80,  ff.  In  V.  353  he  speaks  of  “  l’esprit  ^inconsequence  qui  carac- 
terise  le  Protestantisme,”  and  mourns  the  intellectual  fluctuation,  the 
malady  of  the  age,  which  has  flowed  from  it.  He  thinks  the  recogni¬ 
tion  of  the  solidarity  of  man  and  the  continuity  of  human  life  have 
been  lost  in  the  anarchy  which  has  been  the  work  of  Protestantism. 
This  era  of  revolution,  of  dispersive  analysis,  began,  indeed,  from  the 
fourteenth  century,  continuing  to  the  present  time,  when  it  is  about  to 
close  irrevocably.  Phil.  Pos.,  V.  233,  346 ;  Pol.  Pos.,  III.  417,  500. 
See  also  Littre,  A.  Comte ,  p.  223 ;  and  Paroles,  p.  60.  Dorner,  Hist. 
Prot.  Th.,  I.  272,  points  out  that  the  Reformation  principle,  which  has 
been  so  often  termed  disorganizing,  and  has  even  been  confounded  with 
the  spirit  of  revolution,  gave  effect,  with  a  power  previously  unknown, 
to  the  divine  right  of  civil  authority. 


Lect.  VIII.]  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


341 


of  Rationalism ; 1  an  inevitable  consequence,  in¬ 
deed,  and  one  not,  therefore,  to  be  condemned; 
part  of  the  natural  progress  of  human  effort,  and 
of  the  growth  of  the  human  mind.  This  pro¬ 
gression,  evident  in  all  other  departments  of  social 
activity,  in  industrial  and  secular  advance,  in 
national  morality,  in  philosophy  and  speculation, 
could  not  fail  to  make  itself  felt  in  the  region  of 
theological  opinion.  This  estimate  of  Protestant-  its  esti- 

0  A  ^  mate  of 

ism  will  be  found  (however  it  may  be  connected  Protes- 

.  .  .  .  ...  tantism. 

with  it,)  not  to  be  identical  with  that  of  Positivism ; 
which  regards  it  either  as  a  pure  negation,  or  as  a 
confused  form  of  theological  belief. 

I  have  already  given  reasons  for  believing  that 
Religion,  as  to  its  own  evolution,  is  not  dependent 
on  moral  progress,  and  is  only  indirectly  affected 
by  intellectual  culture.  It  remains  only  to  dis-Howit 

J  ...  affects  the 

engage  the  future  of  Christianity  from  the  conse-  fature  of 
quences  to  which  it  must  be  liable ;  if  it  is  to  be  tianity. 
regarded,  (together,  indeed,  with  all  religions,)  as 
a  thing  of  the  past ;  a  lingering  survival  of  an 
anterior  stage  of  thought  or  civilization  ;  or  again,  * 
as  a  mere  vehicle,  though  of  an  exalted  and  highly 
commendable  kind,  for  passing  on  to  future  gene¬ 
rations  the  gift  of  an  improved  morality.2 

1  See  Mr.  Lecky,  H.  Rat.,  I.  181,  288.  Rationalism,  he  thinks,  is 
the  totality  of  the  influences  of  civilization.  Continental  Protestantism 
has  continually  developed  towards  it. 

2  In  this,  according  to  Rationalistic  theologians,  consists  the  per¬ 
fectibility  of  the  Religion  of  Christ ;  viz.  in  expanding  the  doctrines 
of  Christianity  into  those  eternal  truths  of  reason,  which  constitute  the 


342 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 


Theory  °f  §  2.  The  former  view  regarding  the  prospects 
of  the  Christian  Church  and  more  immediately 
of  Protestantism,  being  that  of  the  Positivist 
school,  forms  part  of  an  elaborate  but  highly 
artificial  criticism  of  life  and  history ;  which  must, 
if  at  all,  be  accepted  as  a  whole.  It  must  defend 
itself  along  its  whole  line  ;  if  it  is  to  be  taken  as  a 
true  explanation  of  the  world  and  of  the  times  in 
whether  which  we  live.  At  present  we  are  concerned  no 

answering  .  . 

to  facts,  further  than  to  inquire  whether  it  offers  the  only 
legitimate  account  of  the  course  of  human  affairs 
in  respect  of  Religion,  and  whether  its  view  is 
sufficiently  confirmed  by  present  facts  and  actual 
probabilities.  No  doubt,  as  has  been  already  said, 
the  Reformation  presents  no  interruption  of  the 
continuity  of  History.1  It  was  itself  the  slow 

universal  possession  of  the  race.  There  is  something  ominous  in  Mr. 
Lecky’s  language  when  he  says:  “Loyalty,  patriotism,  and  attach¬ 
ment  to  a  cosmopolitan  cause,  are  three  forms  of  moral  enthusiasm 
respectively  appropriate  to  three  successive  stages  of  mental  progress : 
and  they  have,  I  think,  a  certain  analogy  to  idolatrous  worship,  Church 
feeling,  and  moral  culture,  which  are  the  central  ideas  of  three  stages  of 
religious  history.” — H.  E.  M.,  I.  142. 

1  “  The  error  of  Positivism,”  writes  Dr.  Westcott,  “is  in  limiting 
Christianity  to  the  view  of  Catholicism.  Christianity  is  supremely 
fitted  to  mould  for  itself  the  organism  which  is  best  suited  to  meet  the 
intellectual,  or  social,  or  moral  wants  of  the  age.  It  is  manifold  in 
embodiment,  though  one  in  essence.  It  is  not  a  principle  of  order,  but 
a  spirit  of  life.  It  is  limited  not  by  laws  of  logical  construction,  but 
by  laws  of  free  growth.  It  survives  the  decay  of  one  organization,  to 
animate  another.” — Cord,  Rev.,  VI.  415.  “  11  est  incontestable  en  effet 

d’apres  l’ensemble  de  notre  passe  intellectuel  pendant  les  trois  derniers 
siecles,  sans  avoir  besoin  de  remontcr  plus  haut,  que  la  continuity  et  la 
fecondite  sont  les  symptomes  les  moins  equivoques  de  toutes  les  con¬ 
ceptions  vraiment  scientifiques.”— Comte,  Phil.  Pcs.,  IV.  2G9.  We 
*  claim  these  also  for  Christianity. 


Lect.  VIII.]  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


343 


result  of  time  and  previous  changes.  Similarly  Results  of 

...  ,  ,  .  .  .  ...  the  Refor- 

also  it  has  in-turn  initiated  changes  which  are  still  mation 
going  on,  and  are  still  the  subjects  of  discussion  progress, 
and  dispute.  The  real  point  is  the  nature  of  these 
changes  and  of  their  consequences.  The  Christian 
world,  it  is  not  denied,  is  endlessly  divided,  and 
shows  as  yet  few  signs  of  ultimate  reunion.  Is 
this,  then,  to  be  held  the  beginning  of  the  end  ? 

Does  it  mark  a  decline  in  the  power  and  spirit  of  Division 

oi  sectS) 

Religion  ? — in  its  hold  upon  the  life  and  mind  and  whether  a 

&  .  •  p  symptom 

conscience  of  its  professors  ? — m  its  capacity  ot  of  decline, 
assimilating  surrounding  conditions  of  culture  and 
of  converting  unbelief  ?  I  cannot  see  that  it  does. 

I  see  in  these  facts  rather  the  evidence  of  the 
working  of  a  leaven  ;  which,  if  it  ceased  to  ferment, 
might  be  justly  suspected  of  inefficacy  and  decay. 

This  leaven  (if  we  have  learned  any  lesson  from 
the  past  history  of  Christianity,  it  is  this ;)  works 
variously  in  accordance  with  the  circumstances  of 
the  time  under  review.  In  Protestantism  it  has  Historical 

.  .  develop- 

been  conditioned  by  the  advance  ot  opinion  ment  of 

_  -  *ii*  Protes- 

through  intellectual  discussion  and  physical  dis-tantism. 
coveries;  by  military  history ;  by  social  and  poli¬ 
tical  vicissitudes  tending  to  a  multiplicity  rather 
than  to  unity  of  form.1  It  has  been  crushed  under 


1  “  However  imposing,”  remarks  Prof.  Westcott,  “  the  apparent  unity 
of  the  religious  life  of  the  Middle  Ages  may  be,  it  cannot  be  questioned 
that  socially  and  individually  the  principles  of  Christianity  are  more 
powerful  now  than  then.  We  lose  the  sense  of  their  general  action  in 
the  variety  of  forms  through  which  they  work.”  —  Comte  on  Chris¬ 
tianity ,  Cord.  Rev.,  VI.  416. 


344 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 


the  burden  of  successive  revolutions.  It  has  been 
made  the  pretext  for  administrative  changes,  and 
thus  complicated  with  political  interests;  at  one 
time  for  resisting  democratic  tendencies ;  at  another 
as  the  enemy  of  all  political  absolutism.1  It  has 
alternately  been  held  to  be  the  friend  or  foe  of 
freedom  of  thought ;  the  ally  or  enemy  of  philoso¬ 
phical  opinion ;  as  fearing  or  welcoming  the  vast 
and  ever-progressing  influences  of  industrial 

dormancy^  develoPment-  through  all  it  has  worked  on  ; 

orreac-  and  worked  after  its  own  kind.  There  have 
tlon 

indeed  been  times  when,  exhausted  by  its  struggles 
for  existence  and  for  toleration,  its  spiritual  powers 
lay  dormant,  and  might  seem  well-nigh  extinct.2 
During  long  periods  the  secularism  of  court 
intrigues,  the  heats  of  metaphysical  controversies, 
the  atheistic  intolerance  of  the  French  Revolution,3 
appeared  to  have  expelled  all  interest  in  the 

See  Lecky,  Hist.  Fat.,  II.  182-186.  The  internecine  struggles  of 
Catholicism  and  the  Reformed  Faith  in  France,  Germany,  and  the 
Is  ctherlands,  may  justly  be  claimed  as  testimonies  to  the  power  of  the 
Religion  which  was  held  to  be  at  stake. — Cf.  Dorner,  II.  3. 

2  Mr.  Herbert  Spencer, .  First  Frinc.,  p.  331,  well  observes  that 
“  Religion,  beside  its  occasional  revivals  of  smaller  magnitude,  has  its 
long  periods  ol  exaltation  and  depression ;  generations  of  belief  and  self- 

sacrifice  following  generations  of  indifference  and  laxity . When 

from  corruptions  accumulated  around  them,  national  creeds  have  fallen 
into  general  discredit,  ending  in  indifferentism  or  positive  denial ;  there 
has  always  by-and-by  arisen  a  re-assertion  of  them,  if  not  the  same  in 
form,  still  the  same  in  essence.  See  Horner’s  remarks  on  the  permanence 
of  the  Christian  Faith  through  all  assaults  of  philosophical  Deism  in 
England,  France,  and  Germany.— Hist  Frot.  Th.,  I.  207 ;  II.  45,  392. 

See  Buckle,  H.  Civ.,  II.  254.  He  admits  that  its  leaders  com¬ 
mitted  what  he  thinks  was  an  involuntary  error:  “In  attacking  the 


Lect.  VIII.]  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


345 


message  and  prospects  of  Christianity.  Yet  the 
instincts  of  Religion  (and,  we  may  fairly  add, 
the  virtue  of  its  specific  doctrines,)  prevailed. 
Successive  revivals  of  the  missionary  spirit  super-  followed 

•  •  by  revi- 

vened  on  eras  of  religious  indifference ;  and  the  vais. 
truth  of  Christian  teaching  has  been  both 
vigorously  defended  and  confirmed  by  actual 
results. 

§  3.  The  question  of  the  direction  and  degree  in  Neweie- 
which  the  prospects  of  Christianity  have  been  progress  ^ 
affected  by  its  history  since  the  Reformation  may  by  the  Re- 
be  narrowed  to  the  inquiry  as  to  what  fresh 
elements  have  been  introduced  into  the  circum¬ 
stances  attending  its  progress  and  with  what 
results.  These  may  be  briefly  summarized  as  the 
principle,  or  rather  the  fact,  of  the  Renaissance  in 
sentiment,  philosophy,  and  art ;  of  Positivism  in 
material  knowledge;  the  substitution  of  inquiry 
for  traditional  authority ;  the  doctrines  of  religious 
liberty  and  toleration,  including  the  freedom  of 
the  press  and  the  disappearance  of  religious  dis¬ 
abilities;1  the  gradual  divorce  of  religion  from 
politics,  with  its  effects  upon  the  alliance  of 
Churches  and  States.  What  is  the  tendency  of  These  still 

clergy,  they  lost  their  respect  for  religion.  I11  their  determination  to  ment* 
weaken  ecclesiastical  power,  they  attempted  to  undermine  the  founda¬ 
tions  of  Christianity.”  Isaac  Taylor,  Hist.  Enthus.,  p.  269,  has  some 
fine  and  just  remarks  on  the  triumph  of  the  Christian  Religion  at  this 
period. 

1  It  will  be  understood  that  these  are,  as  Gibbon  remarks,  the  con¬ 
sequences,  not  the  design,  of  the  Reformation. 


346 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 


whether 
adverse  to 
Chris¬ 
tianity. 


The  clas¬ 
sical  or 
human  ele¬ 
ment  in 
modern 
civiliza¬ 
tion 


these  changes  in  opinion  and  practice,  changes 
which  are  still  ripening  into  action  on  every  side 
through  the  length  and  breadth  of  Europe  ?  If 
there  be  contained  within  them  nothing  really 
and  essentially  unfavourable  to  the  growth  and 
well-being  of  Christianity,  there  is  no  ground  on 
this  account  at  least  to  augur  the  decline  of  the 
Religion.  If,  indeed,  they  tend  in  harmony  with 
its  doctrines  towards  the  spread  of  a  simpler  and 
more  tolerant  Christianity,  there  is  rather  reason 
to  infer  a  larger  and  lasting  measure  of  success  for 
its  tenets.  It  becomes  necessary,  then,  to  enter, 
although  but  briefly,  on  some  consideration  of 
their  several  characters  and  operation. 

§  4.  By  some  the  Reformation  has  been  altogether 
traced  to  the  importation  of  the  classical  or  purely 
human  element  into  Western  Europe,1  which  was 
the  result  in  the  first  instance  of  the  impact  of 
Mahommedanism  upon  Christianity,  and  of  the  fall 
of  Constantinople.  Philosophy  and  taste  were  revo¬ 
lutionized  by  contact  with  the  independence  of 


1  See  Ranke,  Hist,  of  Popes ,  I.  ii.  §  3,  and  Gicseler,  Vol.  V.,  §  154, 
who  assigns  to  this  element  its  due  share  of  result.  Herder  almost 
couples  Ulric  v.  Hutten  with  Luther  in  the  work  of  Reformation.  See 
Hal  lam,  Lit.  LJ.,  I.  290-7.  At  first  the  progress  of  literature  seemed 
checked  :  and  Erasmus  writes  (1528),  “  Ubicunque  regnat  Lutheranis- 
mus,  ibi  literarum  est  interitus.”  At  an  earlier  stage  he  had  made 
similar  complaints  of  the  Catholic  party.  “  Hajresis  est  polity  loqui : 
h.Ticsis  Giaice  sciie.  See  Sir  W.  Hamilton,  Disc.y  p.  209.  Socinianism 
may  be  rightly  regarded  as  the  issue  of  the  Reformation  in  Italy,  where 
philosophic  and  esthetic  culture  gained  the  ascendency  over  the  ethical 
and  religious  elements.  Sec  Horner,  Hist.  Prot.  Th.t  II.  427. 


Lect.  VIII.]  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


347 


ancient  modes  of  thought  and  feeling  :  and  quickly 
sought  new  outlets  of  expression.  Hence  the  in¬ 
fluence  of  the  so-called  Humanists  on  the  direction 
and  character  of  the  Reformation,  the  success  of 
which  was  in  many  minds  identified  with  the  pro¬ 
gress  of  classical  literature.  The  proof  of  so  wide 
an  assertion  must  certainly  remain  doubtful.  For 
our  present  purpose  the  admission  is  sufficient  that 
the  presence  of  u  the  new  learning  ”  was  a  fact  con¬ 
temporaneous  with  the  tendencies  towards  a  refor¬ 
mation  in  religion.  The  relations  of  an  increased  recognized 

o  ana  era- 

acquaintance  with  the  original  tongues  to  the  doctri- 
nal  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  are  immediately  formers 
apparent;  and  their  value  was  accordingly  sub¬ 
stantially  acknowledged  by  some  of  the  leading 
Reformers  i1  to  whom,  both  in  Germany  and  Eng¬ 
land,  the  improvement,  and  in  some  cases  the  foun¬ 
dation,  of  public  schools  is  due.  The  wider  influence 
of  classical  models  in  framing  new  standards  of 
literary,  philosophical,  and  moral  conceptions,  in  not 
loosening  the  shackles  of  traditional  dogmatism,  in  to  Chris- 

.  .  .  tian  ten- 

transforming  religious  sentiments  by  the  mstru-  dencies, 
mentality  of  art,  may  be  differently  estimated,  but 


1  In  1525  Luther  addressed  a  Treatise  to  the  Councillors  of  every 
town  in  Germany,  “  that  they  ought  to  institute  and  maintain  Chris¬ 
tian  schools,”  i.  e.  national  schools.  Melancthon  and  Camerarius 
laboured  at  the  establishment  of  classical  schools,  Lycea ,  and  Gymnasia. 
Melancthon  himself  kept  for  many  years  a  scliola  privata.  See  Dorncr, 
H.  Trot.  Tli.,  I.  2G1-270.  Hallam,  Lit.  of  E.,  1.  330.  For  England, 
comp.  Seebohm’s  Oxford  Reformers,  sc.  Colet,  Linacre,  More,  &c.  See 
further  Whewell,  lnd.  Phil.,  Bk.  XI L,  ix. 


348 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 


repre¬ 
senting  an 
aspect  of 
truth, 


necessary 
to  their 
comple¬ 
tion. 


will  hardly  be  denied.  It  would,  however,  be  but 
a  narrow  view  which  regards  the  tendencies  of 
Classicism  as  essentially  irreligious  or  un-Christian.1 
Rather  may  we  see  in  this  period  of  European 
civilization  the  introduction  to  a  permanent  syn¬ 
thesis  of  two  differing  sides  of  human  nature  and 
human  history  :  of  the  natural  with  the  spiritual : 
of  reason  with  religion  :  of  an  aesthetical  appre¬ 
hension  of  the  Beautiful  with  the  higher  aspira¬ 
tions  of  Christian  devotion  :  a  synthesis  ever  in 
process  of  completion  yet  unfulfilled.  Christianity 
which  in  its  origin  had  successfully  contended  with 
heathen  Philosophy  and  Art  in  their  decline,  was 
inevitably  destined,  at  some  future  stage  of  human 
culture,  to  encounter  the  elements  of  Truth  which 
they  enshrined,  to  adopt  them  into  its  own 
theory  of  reality,  and  mould  them  after  its  own 

1  A  recent  historian  (Lecky,  II.  322)  has  endeavoured  to  trace  the  in¬ 
fluences  of  Rationalism  upon  Art,  “  a  chief  organ  of  religious  sentiments 
and  shows  how  in  the  course  of  secularization  the  ideal  of  piety  was  ex¬ 
changed  for  that  of  beauty  ;  more  especially  in  Painting  and  Architecture, 
following  the  intellectual  condition  of  the  times,  lb.,  I.  263-286.  There  can 
be  no  question  as  to  the  immediate  and,  in  some  respects,  lasting  effect 
of  the  introduction  of  classic  models,  and  of  the  sense  of  freedom  gained 
at  the  era  of  the  Reformation.  Nothing,  however,  is  proved  by  it  as  to 
the  declension  of  Christian  influence.  In  Architecture,  the  Gothic  style, 
a  conception  which,  if  any,  is  the  creation  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  is 
once  more  in  the  ascendant:  and  there  are  indications  of  a  similar 
tendency  in  the  Poetry  of  the  time.  Of  Painting  I  need  hardly  speak. 
Schlegel  remarks  that,  of  the  sister  arts,  Painting  is  the  most  truly 
spiritual,  and,  together  with  Music,  has  in  modern  Christendom  been 
most  employed  to  exhibit  or  suggest  the  mysteries  of  Divine  Love. 
Sculpture,  and  to  some  extent  Architecture,  as  its  attendant,  occupied 
with  the  development  of  organic  form,  attained  even  in  heathen  times 
their  richest  cultivation. 


Lect.  VIII.]  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


349 


thought.  The  result  thus  far  would  not  appear  to 
have  been  either  the  decline  or  degradation  of 
Religion  ;  much  less  the  contradiction  or  empover- 
ishment  of  tenets  essential  to  the  sum  of  Christian 
Faith ;  but  rather  the  introduction  of  a  broader  yet 
deeper  religious  type  in  the  adaptation  of  Revealed 
Truth  to  the  abstract  conceptions  of  the  mind.  No 
doubt  the  tendency  of  a  classical  revival  in  Science  Apparent 

#  .  divorce  of 

and  in  Art  has  been,  in  the  first  instance,  towards  art  from 
the  separate  cultivation  of  distinct  principles  of  sentiment 
Truth  and  Beauty.  Hence  the  apparent  and  tem¬ 
porary  divorce  of  Religion  from  Science;  and 
during  the  last  century,  and  partly  in  our  own, 
from  Art  itself.  The  medieval  intellect  may  be 
said  to  have  been  entirely  and  extravagantly  reli¬ 
gious  ;  just  as  in  Greece  and  Rome  it  showed  itself 
exclusively  human.1  It  still  remains  to  dev elope  a 
type  of  thought  and  conception  which  shall  har¬ 
monize,  after  the  fundamental  idea  of  the  Religion 
of  Christ,  the  Human  and  Divine.  There  is,  then,  tempo- 
little  to  suggest  that  the  separation  of  Art  and  Phi¬ 
losophy  from  Christian  influence  is  other  than 
transient  and  contingent :  or  to  show  that  Classi¬ 
cism  and  the  entrance  of  a  so-called  Rationalistic 

1  “  In  the  East  intellect  is  entirely  religious  ;  in  Greek  society  it  is 
exclusively  human  ;  in  the  modern  world  the  religious  spirit  is  mixed 
up  with  everything,  hut  excludes  nothing.  Modern  intellect  has  at  once 
the  stamp  of  humanity  and  of  divinity.  Human  sentiments  and 
interests  occupy  an  important  place  in  our  literature;  and  yet  the 
religious  character  of  man,  that  portion  of  his  existence  which  links 
him  to  another  world,  appears  in  every  step.” — Guizot,  Civ.  en  Europe , 

Le?.  vime- 


350 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 


Position 
of  the 
Positive 
Sciences. 


element  have  exercised  any  morbific  effect  upon 
the  powers  of  Revealed  Religion. 

§  5*  The  relations  to  Christianity  of  an  increased 
knowledge  of  the  material  world,  and,  as  its  result, 
of  a  Positive  system  of  philosophy,  have  already 
been  considered  in  various  aspects.  The  notion 
that  the  world  through  the  possession  of  the  Posi¬ 


tive  Sciences  has,  since  the  older  classical  and 
medieval  periods,  entered  on  a  new  phase  of  know¬ 
ledge  and  reflection,  is  plainly  not  without  founda¬ 
tion.  If  we  compare  the  present  condition  of  the 
Natural  Sciences  with  times  in  which  Mathematics 
together  with  the  rudiments  of  Astronomy,  Mecha¬ 
nics,  and  Medicine  constituted  their  whole  domain  :l 
when  Physics,  Biology,  and  Comparative  Physio- 
logy  existed  only  in  outline ;  and  Chemistry  and 
Geology  were  wholly  unknown;  the  difference  is 
abeyance  ^ar£>e  indeed.  Yet  this  was  all  that  antiquity  could 

vaHimes"  keclueath  to  after-ages ;  and  all  that  the  industry 
‘  and  penetration  of  the  Arabians,  having  culled 
from  their  intercourse  with  the  Greek  Empire, 
brought  into  the  common  stock  of  knowledge. 


1  “  La  mathematique  et  l’astronomie,  seul  domaine  que  l’antiquite 
possedat  dans  la  positivite  (la  physique  et  la  biologie  n’etaient  qu’d- 
bauche'es,  et  la  chimie  n’existait  pas),”  &c.— Littre,  Etudes  sur  les 
Bay  bar  es,  p.  xvii.  Humboldt  pronounces  the  Arabians  the  true 
founders  of  the  Physical  Sciences,  according  to  the  modern  acceptation  of 
them.  They  added  to  the  old  Greek  conceptions  the  use  of  Experiment 
and  Computation.  See  Lange,  Gesch.des  Matericdismus ,  p.  83.  Comte 
considers  Physics  to  have  commenced  with  Galileo’s  discoveries  on  the 
fall  of  heavy  bodies :  and  that  Geometry  almost  begins  with  Descartes ; 
that  of  the  ancients  having  been  of  a  special  and  limited  character. 


35i 


Lect.  VIII.]  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


There  was  an  absence,  whatever  may  be  said  of  the 
inductive  processes  indicated  by  Plato  or  by  Aris¬ 
totle,  not  only  of  real  information,  but  also  of  the 
method  to  seek  it  and  to  use  it  when  found.1  Is  it, 
then,  to  be  supposed  that  with  these  changes  the 
limits  or  direction  of  even  abstract  speculation 
could  have  remained  modelled  only  on  ancient 
practice  ?  It  is  further  true  that,  through  the  sup-  Their  re¬ 
pression  by  medieval  Catholicism  of  the  critical  unfavour- 
Spirit,  the  antagonism  between  the  defenders  of  Religion, 
Revealed  and  the  investigators  of  Natural  Truth, 
more  apparent  than  real,  was  largely  increased. 

Nor  at  first  was  this  doctrine  of  authority  much 
impaired  by  the  interposition  of  Protestantism. 

The  Reformation,  it  has  been  well  said  by  Hal  lam, 2  ]^or 

“  was  but  a  change  of  masters,”  and  those  great 
men,  who  had  been  really,  though  unconsciously, them* 
contending  for  a  perpetual  freedom  of  belief,  were 
the  first  to  coerce  speculation,  and  to  inhibit  differ¬ 
ences  of  opinion  in  matters  of  faith.  But  it  is  for¬ 
gotten  by  the  leaders  of  the  school  of  thought, 
which  would  substitute  positive  knowledge  for 
theological  beliefs,  that  the  general  emancipation  of 
thought  effected  by  the  Reformation  was  posterior 


1  See  at  length  Whewell,  Hist,  of  Induct.  Sc.,  Bk.  IV.  Religion,  or 
rather  Theology,  being  in  the  Middle  Ages  the  only  outlet  for  human 
effort  and  human  interests,  may  seem  to  have  suffered  from  the  very 
introduction  of  other  fields  of  inquiry. 

2  Literature  of  Europe ,  I.  370.  Lecky,  Hist.  Bat.,  I.  404,  pursues 
this  topic  with  some  vehemence. 


352 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 


to  the  religious  revolution  and  dependent  upon  it.1 
Religion  also  during  the  same  period  with  Science 
had  entered  upon  a  new  phase  or  stand-point  of 
opinion;  of  which,  however,  the  Reformation  was  the 
true  cause  and  spring.  Science  and  Religion  may 
be  long  in  working  out  upon  a  common  footing  the 

Protes-  details  of  their  respective  systems.  But  it  can  be 

tantism  A  ^ 

friendly  to  no  real  argument  (although  repeatedly  urged  by 
M.  Comte)  against  the  truth  of  a  Protestant  Chris¬ 
tianity,  that  it  has  revolted  from  the  domination  of 
an  unreasoning  Catholicism :  however  imposing  in 
speculation,  or  even  in  its  historical  results,  may  be 
the  idea  of  unity. 

ism  11  oft iie  §  6.  If  it  were  true,  as  has  been  alleged,  that 

true  con-  Rationalism  is  the  legitimate  result  of  Scepticism 

sequence  ... 

of  toiera-  and  Toleration  in  religious  belief  ;2  it  might  next  be 

tion  of  /  o 

opinion. 

1  Guizot,  Civ.  en  E .,  Lep.  xnme,  points  out  that  “while  the  civil  and 
religious  societies  have  undergone  the  same  vicissitudes  and  been  subject 
to  the  same  revolutions,  resulting  in  the  overthrow  of  absolute  power, 
the  religious  society  has  always  been  foremost  in  this  career.”  So,  in 
pronouncing  on  the  English  Revolution  of  1688,  Hallam  observes  that  it 
“  is  justly  entitled  to  honour  as  the  era  of  religious,  in  a  far  greater 
degree  than  of  civil,  liberty  :  the  privilege  of  conscience  having  had  no 
earlier  Magna  Charta,  and  Petition  of  Right,  whereto  they  could  appeal 
against  encroachment.”—  Const.  Hist.,  II.  324.  So  also  Mr.  Buckle 
Hist.  Civ., II.  138,  sees  “in  the  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century  the 
seeds  of  those  great  political  revolutions  which,  in  the  seventeenth 
century  broke  out  in  nearly  every  part  of  Europe.” 

2  Mr.  Lecky,  Hist.  Bat.,  I.  400,  406,  regards  Rationalism  as  the  issue 
of  the  Reformation ;  and  Toleration  as  the  result  and  measure  of 
Rationalism  in  Protestant  countries.  He  nowhere,  indeed,  in  his  work, 
defines  Rationalism  ;  but  in  more  than  one  passage  sufficiently  describes 
his  notion  of  it.  It  is  a  disbelief  in  authority  (I.  90),  a  demand  for 
evidence.  “The  essence  of  the  rationalistic  spirit  is  to  interpret  the 


Lect.  VIII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY, \ 


353 


asked  whether  Scepticism  may  not  be  considered 
to  have  been  the  natural  result  of  the  Reformation 
and  of  the  changes  which  were  then  inaugurated. 
And  there  are  writers  of  a  free  and  philosophic 
spirit  who  seem  to  see  nothing  mediate  between 
Roman  Catholicism  and  what  they  denominate 
Rationalism.  But  while  admitting  that  toleration 
of  opinion  is  the  legitimate  consequence  of  private 
judgment,  and  that  the  principle  of  private  judg¬ 
ment  was  the  privilege  asserted  for  human  thought 
in  the  act  of  the  Reformation  ;  it  still  remains  to  be 
shown  that  private  judgment  itself  is  identical  with 
Rationalism  in  anything  like  the  current  accepta¬ 
tion  of  the  term,  or  in  a  sense  to  be  held  perilous 
to  the  claims  of  Revelation.  Faith,  it  needs  hardly 
be  repeated,  is,  on  the  one  hand,  no  unreasoning 
acceptance  of  truths,  however  sacred.  Nor  again  is 
the  admission  of  Authority  in  matters  of  Religion 


articles  of  special  creeds  by  the  principles  of  universal  religion,  by  the 
wants,  the  aspirations  and  the  moral  sentiments  which  seem  inherent  in 
human  nature.  It  leads  men,  in  other  words,  to  judge  what  is  true  and 
what  is  good,  not  by  the  teachings  of  tradition,  but  by  the  light  of 
reason  and  of  conscience.”  Adopting  Dr.  Farrar’s  learned  and  careful 
history  of  the  term,  “  nationalism  is  properly  opposed  to  Super¬ 
naturalism, ,  having  Eeason,  and  not  Revelation,  for  its  formal  principle ; 
and  stands  for  a  purely  philosophical  view  of  religious  truth.” — Bamp- 
ton  Lectt .,  pp.  589-592.  It  is  hence  of  importance  to  insist  that  the 
right  use  of  reason  does  not  tend  to  diminish  faith  in  the  supernatural ; 
nor  was  there  any  such  tendency  inherent  in  the  principles  of  the 
Reformation ;  which  gave  the  occasion  only  and  imposed  the  duty  of  free 
inquiry.  Hegelianism  (Panlogism,  as  it  has  been  termed)  is  the  acme 
of  Rationalism,  which  supersedes  or  constitutes  reality.  “  Alles,  was 
wirklich  ist,  ist  vernunftig.” 

2  A 


Involved 
in  the 
principle 
of  private 
judgment. 


Real  sense 
of  Ration¬ 
alism. 


354 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 


Perilous 
position  of 
Roman 
Catholi¬ 
cism. 


Aid  afford¬ 
ed  by  the 
principle 
of  Protes¬ 
tantism. 


within  limits  other  than  a  reasonable  principle.1 
The  English  Divines,  to  go  no  further  than  our 
own  country,  who  have  fought  the  battle  of  reli¬ 
gious  toleration,2  were  neither  Sceptics  nor,  as  the 
word  is  generally  understood,  Rationalists.  In  the 
Church  of  Rome  Scepticism  has  indeed  at  all  times 
shown  a  direct  and  dangerous  opposition  towards 
Christianity  itself:3  because  the  very  truth  of 
Christianity  is  there  staked  upon  the  positive  insti¬ 
tutions  of  the  Church  ;  and  now,  as  it  would  appear, 
upon  the  infallibility  of  its  visible  head.  But  it 
has  not  been  so  within  the  domain  of  Protestantism  ; 
in  England,  America,  or  even  in  Germany.  Here 
Protestantism,  as  admitting  toleration  of  religious 
opinion,  shows  itself  the  hope  of  Christian  doctrine, 
and  the  ground  of  its  ultimate  permanence.  “  There 
is  no  such  thing,”  it  has  been  truly  enough  said, 
“  as  a  theological  antiseptic.”  But  Protestantism, 
by  blending  with  and  consecrating  the  prevailing 
Rationalistic  spirit,4  affords  a  standing  remedy  for 
traditional  and  authoritative  corruptions  of  belief. 

1  See  this  argued  by  Hooker,  E.  P.,  V.  viii.,  who  does  not  exclude 
“  invincible  arguments  found  out  by  the  light  of  reason.” 

2  Hales,  Chillingworth,  Jeremy  Taylor:  not  to  speak  among  laymen 
of  Milton  and  Locke. 

3  Thus,  very  early  in  the  age  of  the  Reformation,  the  attempt  was 
made  by  the  Italian  Humanists  to  unite  the  extremes  of  sceptical 
unbelief  and  passive  obedience  to  the  authority  of  the  Church.  See 
Dorner,  Hist.  Prot.  Th.,  Yol.  II. ;  Lecky,  H.  P.,  I.  406,  and  Mr.  Buckle’s 
remarks  on  the  causes  of  the  French  Revolution,  II.  249. 

4  Mr.  Lecky,  Hist.  Pat.,  II.  92,  justly  observes,  “  When  a  country, 
which  is  nominally  Roman  Catholic,  is  very  tolerant,  it  maybe  inferred, 
with  almost  absolute  certainty,  that  the  social  and  intellectual  influence 


Lect.  VIII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


355 


§  7.  Love  of  truth  may  he  iironounced  to  Love  of 
have  been  the  rudimentary  virtue  of  Beformed  mdhVen- 
Christianity.  This  virtue,  in  the  intensity  0f ta1'^ virtue* 
its  spiritual  conviction,  lay  at  the  root  of  the 
movement;  and  is  still  the  proper  attribute  of 
Protestantism  as  a  system.  It  is  true  that  fana¬ 
ticism  may  sometimes  have  done  it  injustice  in 
this  respect ;  and,  through  intolerance  in  theory 
and  practice,1  have  raised  the  doubt  as  to  its  pre¬ 
ference  of  an  authorized  creed  to  the  results  of 
genuine  inquiry.  Yet  it  has  rarely,  if  ever,  subor¬ 
dinated  moral  distinctions  to  positive  expediency ; 
the  means  to  the  end ;  or  sanctioned  pious  frauds.2 
In  its  love  of  truth  it  has  ever  sympathized  with  Obscured 
the  instincts  of  physical  discovery,  and  the  employ-  dice, 
ment  of  a  scientific  method.3  The  marked  diffusion 

of  the  Church  is  comparatively  small.  But  England  and  America  con¬ 
clusively  prove  that  a  nation  may  be  very  tolerant,  and  at  the  same 
time  profoundly  Protestant.  ...  It  is  this  fact  which  is  the  most  pro¬ 
pitious  omen  of  the  future  of  Protestantism.” 

1  Hallam’s  verdict  {Const.  Hist.,  I.  94)  is,  “the  difference  as  to 
tolerance  in  religion  between  Catholics  and  Protestants  was  only  in 
degree,  and  in  degree  there  was  much  less  difference  than  we  are  apt  to 
believe;”  and  see  Mr.  Lecky’s  severe  strictures,  II.  Rat.,  II.  54-61,  and 
Buckle,  II.  51.  Yet  Hallam  {u.  s .,  p.  119)  seems  to  admit  that  the 
principle  of  toleration  was  early  and  persistently  avowed  by  Protestants. 

Certainly,  it  must  be  allowed  to  have  lain  as  a  germ  in  the  system, 
however  late  in  bearing  fruit,  both  in  our  own  and  other  countries. 

The  principles  of  Romanism  are  unfortunately  committed  to  persecution. 

2  On  the  degree  to  which  the  medieval  interpolations  and  forgeries  had 
“  blotted  out  the  very  sense  and  love  of  truth  from  the  minds  of  men,” 
see  Mr.  Lecky’s  just  remarks,  II.  Rat.,  I.  434-6 ;  H.  E.  M.,  II.  225. 

3  In  England,  we  may  fairly  instance  Bacon,  Boyle,  and  Newton. 

Among  the  founders  of  the  Royal  Society  were  Wilkins,  Spratt,  Glanvil, 
and  other  Churchmen. 


2  a  2 


356 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 


of  a  truthful  spirit,  which  has  been  the  characteristic 
of  the  era  of  Protestantism,  has  been  variously 
ascribed  to  the  revival  of  ancient  independent 
systems  of  philosophy,  to  the  influence  of  modern 
secular  thinkers,  and  to  the  general  results  of 
Physical  advancing  civilization.1  It  may  with  equal  reason, 
fndXted  and  with  perhaps  more  probability,  be  attributed 
tandsm?5"  to  the  reaction  of  religious  inquiry  upon  philoso¬ 
phical  speculation  and  active  life.  But  in  either 
case  its  possession  by  a  religious  system,  as  part  of 
its  inherent  and  fundamental  principles,  is  both  an 
element  of  real  progress,  and  a  guarantee  of  per¬ 
manence  to  the  Faith  which  it  upholds. 

Religious  §  g#  TPg  doctrine  of  religious  liberty,  although 

liberty  im-  ^  .  0  ..... 

mediately  did  not  immediately  bear  fruit,  is  in  principle 

involved  _  v  . 

in  the  Re-  fairly  and  incontestably  due  to  the  Reformation  ; 

formation,  J  . 

which  did  not,  however,  take  its  rise  m  any  notions 
of  political  freedom.2  Experience  shows,  it  is  true, 
that,  under  all  systems,  persecution  for  opinion  is 
dear  to  human  nature.  But  it  has  never  been 
proved  to  be  a  consequence  of  Christian  doctrine. 
Until  the  establishment  of  the  Church  under  Con¬ 
stantine,  the  testimony  of  the  Fathers  is  wholly  in 
favour  of  toleration  of  belief.  It  is  in  practice 
though  not  that  the  difficulties  emerge  of  working  out  the 

at  once 
secured. 

1  Lecky,  H.  R,  I.  440 ;  H.  E.  M .,  I.  143. 

2  “  Political  liberty,”  says  Hallam,  Lit .  E.,  I.  352,  “  in  the  sense  we 
use  the  word,  cannot  be  reckoned  the  aim  of  those  who  introduced  the 
Reformation.”  See  also  the  section  (II.  33)  on  the  Political  Philosophy 
of  the  sixteenth  century.  Compare  Mr.  Mill  on  Liberty ,  Introd. 


357 


Lect.  VIII.]  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


application  of  the  principle  of  freedom  without  dis¬ 
turbance,  yet  without  injustice.  The  removal  ol 
religious  disabilities,  and  the  relations  of  theolo- 
gical  beliefs  to  political  government,  have,  since 
the  Reformation,  become  of  necessity  the  questions 
of  the  age ;  and  once  more,  after  an  interval  of 
temporary  cessation,  loom  large  on  the  horizon  of 
public  opinion  in  Europe.  But  their  solution  no  r  radical 
longer  involves  the  rise  or  fall  of  Christianity,  its  still  ex¬ 
success  or  decline.  The  usefulness  of  Establish¬ 


ments1  and  of  National  Churches  in  preserving  a 
just  liberty  of  belief  against  sectarian  or  unsec¬ 
tarian  tyranny ;  as  also  in  combating  so  formidable 
an  opponent  as  “  the  close  phalanx  of  Rome may 
be  too  readily  forgotten.  On  the  other  hand,  but  no 
there  is  good  reason  to  augur,  from  the  mtnnsi-  dangerous 

•  to  tllC  CX“ 

cally  spiritual  character  of  our  Religion,  that  it  istence  of 
would,  under  the  most  voluntary  system,  be  found  tianity, 
the  most  readily  to  flourish.3  But  in  any  case  the 
true  interests  of  Christianity  are  independent  of 


1  On  this  side  may  be  claimed  so  liberal  a  thinker  as  Shaftesbury,  who 
quotes  Harrington  to  the  effect  that  “  it  is  necessary  people  should  have 
a  public  leading  in  religion.”  “  Why,”  he  adds,  “  should  there  not  be 
public  walks,  as  well  as  private  gardens?” — Characteristics ,  I.  17. 

2  “  It  is  still  very  doubtful  whether  the  close  phalanx  of  Rome 
can  be  opposed,  in  ages  of  strong  religious  zeal,  by  anything  except 
established  or  at  least  confederate  Churches.” — Hallam,  Hist.  Lit .,  1 
372. 

3  See  Sir  G.  C.  Lewis’s  observations  ( Essay  on  Authority ,  p.  301) : 
Mr.  Buckle  (Hist.  Civ.,  II.  53)  considers  that  “a  religion,  not  protected 
by  the  Government,  usually  displays  greater  energy  and  greater  vitality 
than  one  which  is  so  protected.”  He  further  gives  a  rationale  of  the 
fact. 


353 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII 


nor  to  its 
true  in¬ 
terests. 


Question 
of  religious 
establish¬ 
ments. 


the  secularization  of  politics.  They  are  bound  up 
with  the  maintenance  of  the  Scriptures,  its  sole 
authoritative  records,  and  with  the  earliest  prin¬ 
ciples  of  their  interpretation,  historically  ascer¬ 
tained  ;  and  these,  it  must  be  admitted,  are  on  the 
side  of  religious  equality,  and  a  reasonable  employ¬ 
ment  of  private  judgment.1  It  may,  however,  be 
remarked,  that  a  belief  in  the  progressive  power  of 
the  Religion,  and  of  its  capacity  and  value  in 
civilization,  seems  a  necessary  part  of  a  theory  of 
religious  establishments ;  for,  as  representing  a 
system  of  abstract  truth  only,  few  would  care 
greatly  to  support  them.2  Were  the  Faith  of  Jesus 
Christ  confined  in  its  teaching  to  any  one  form  of 
political  government,  absolute  or  popular ;  this 
might,  in  some  quarters,  and  with  some  show  of 
fairness,  be  deemed  an  evidence  of  its  transient  and 

1  On  the  equality  and  diversity  of  particular  Churches,  it  may  he 
remarked  that  the  Primitive  Liturgies  and  even  Creeds  bear  evidence 
of  the  independence  of  their  several  forms,  while  united  by  a  community 
of  doctrine ;  see  Bingham,  E.  A.,  Bk.  II.  c.  vi.  Some  good  remarks  on 
the  relation  of  private  judgment  to  a  common  standard  of  authority 
existing  in  the  Church  will  be  found  in  Bp.  Browne,  Expos,  of  Arts, 

р.  480  ;  in  Gladstone,  Church  and  State,  c.  v. ;  and  Palmer,  Treatise 
on  the  Church,  II.  vi. 

2  The  grave  question  as  to  the  duty  of  the  State  to  propagate  truth 
is,  at  the  present  time,  practically  superseded  by  a  belief  that  it  is  not 
for  the  interest  of  the  truth  to  seek  the  assistance  of  the  State.  With¬ 
out  taking  up  the  high  ground  of  Mr.  Gladstone  ( Church  and  State, 

с.  iii.  viii.),  it  is  enough  to  observe  that  even  Macaulay  ( Essays ,  p.  487) 
would  maintain  the  duty  of  religious  instruction  on  the  part  of  the 
Government  as  a  secondary  obligation  from  its  utility  as  a  moral  in¬ 
strument.  If,  then,  its  value  as  a  spiritual  agency  be  taken  into 
account,  the  obligation  is  surely  enhanced ;  as  well  as  the  danger  of 
making  no  provision  against  false  outlets  for  the  enthusiasm  un¬ 
doubtedly  natural  to  mankind. 


359 


Lect.  VIII.]  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

limited  character.  Such,  however,  we  know  from 
its  own  doctrines,  as  well  as  from  the  course  of  its 
history,  not  to  he  the  case.  Born  under  the  grow-  Regions 
in p*  absolutism  of  the  first  years  of  the  Roman  tianity  as 

o  ^  a  system 

Empire,  tlie  Church,  though  instinctively  leaning  of  religion 

17  .  -1  to  politics. 

to  the  rights  of  possession,  as  the  best  practical 
proof  of  its  negation  of  all  claims  to  temporal 
power;1 2  favoured  political  progress  and  liberty. 

True  it  is,  that  the  original  freedom  of  its  prin¬ 
ciples  has,  in  the  course  of  human  affairs,  been 
limited  and  arrested  by  the  force  of  circumstances, 
and  the  errors  of  individual  leaders.  It  has  accord¬ 
ingly  been  reproached  with  its  tendencies  to  Theo¬ 
cracy  ;  with  the  alliances  it  has  contracted  with 
despotism ;  and  with  the  slavishness  of  its  passive 
obedience.3  Yet  no  doctrine  of  Divine  Right  can 
be  proved  in  reality  to  encumber  its  system ;  and 


1  Mr.  Buckle  treats  the  distinction  of  de  facto  and  de  jure  with  much 
contempt;  and  as  a  quibble  invented  to  save  the  pockets  of  the  clergy, 
or  to  cover  Jesuitry.  Hist.  Civ.,  I.  413.  While  acknowledging  to  the 
full  the  high  qualities  of  the  Non-jurors,  I  still  regard  this  view  as  a 

narrow  one. 

2  Shaftesbury  denounced  Christianity  as  incompatible  with  freedom  ; 
and  even  Mr.  Buckle  seems  to  agree  in  the  opinion  that,  “  by  being  a 
good  Churchman,  a  person  may  become  a  bad  citizen.”  No  doubt, 
medieval  Catholicism  has  neutralized  its  earlier  services  of  distinguish¬ 
ing  spiritual  from  temporal  authority  by  its  later  attempts  to  subordi¬ 
nate  the  latter  to  the  former.  Montesquieu,  E.  L.,  XXIV.  iii.  v.,  con¬ 
siders  the  genius  of  Christianity  best  suited  to  a  constitutional  form 
of  Government;  while  Mahometanism  is  the  religion  of  despotism  ;  and 
that  Catholicism  has  an  affinity  for  monarchy,  but  Protestantism  lor 
a  republic.  Guizot,  however,  admits  that,  historically,  the  Church  has 

always  presented  herself  as  the  interpreter  and  defender  of  theocracy  or 
despotism,  under  a  religious  or  civil  form.  The  origin  of  this  fact  he 


360 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 


Its  inde¬ 
pendence. 


Supposed 
leaning  to 
wards  de¬ 
mocracy. 


the  highest  supporters  of  the  Papal  power  have  at 
times  maintained  even  ultra- democratic  opinions. 
Democracy,  indeed,  in  the  opinion  of  many  the 
ultimate  form  of  existing  governments ;  the  neces¬ 
sary  result,  it  is  maintained,  of  the  conclusions  of 
political  economy,  of  the  increase  of  capital,  of  the 
expansion  of  knowledge,1  and  of  industrial  move¬ 
ments  ;  is  in  some  respects  the  truest  aspect  of  the 
spirit  of  Christianity  as  the  last  and  highest  expres¬ 
sion  of  the  Christian  ideal  of  the  brotherhood  of 
mankind.2  “  Unam  omnium  rempublicam  agnos- 
cimus  mundum,”  cries  Tertullian  in  his  defence  of 
Christianity  ;  66  Omnium  Christianorum  respublica 
est,”  is  the  echo  of  Augustine.3  In  this  freedom, 
or,  it  may  be,  indifference,  of  the  political  stand- 

traces  to  the  natural  conflict  between  religious  restraint  and  human 
liberty. — Civ.  en  E .,  Lef.  vime.  “  Le  Christianisme,”  says  De  Maistre, 
(Euvres,  p.  121,  “  est  monarchique ;  comme  tout  le  monde  le  gait.”— 
See  Du  Pape,  I.  249. 

1  “  The  state  of  knowledge,”  says  Bacon,  “is  ever  a  Democratic ;  and 
that  prevaileth  which  is  most  agreeable  to  the  senses  and  conceits  of 
people.” — Works ,  III.  227. 

2  Lecky,  H.  Rat.,  II.  248.  Comp.  Schmidt,  Essai,  Bk.  II.  c.  ii. 
Dean  Milman,  Ihst.  Eat.  Clir.,  VI.  210,  has  eloquently  pointed  out  the 
libu al  elements  in  medieval  Catholicism,  their  effects  on  social  rank  and 
in  pi  oclaiming  the  equality  of  mankind.  See  also  Guizot’s  remarks, 
C7v.  en  E.,  Lef.  vme,  on  the  amount  of  individual  freedom  which 
modified  the  spiritual  tyranny  of  the  pretensions  of  the  Church. 

3  .^ertull*»  APol->  c-  xxxviii. ;  Augustine,  De  Op.  Monach,  c.  xv., 
xxxiii.  4 he  indifference  of  Christians  to  political  affairs,  not  unnatural 
under  the  circumstances  of  the  time  and  at  the  rise  of  the  new  Religion, 
was  at  first  thought  a  consequence  of  their  doctrines.  It  was  held 

doctrinam  Christi  adversam  esse  reipublicai.” — August.,  .Zfp.  cxxxviii., 
ad  Marcell.  Mr.  Lecky,  II.  Rat.,  II.  108,  regards  all  patriotism  as  a 
pagan,  and  cot  a  Christian,  virtue.  Even  if  this  view  were  correct,  it 
would  but  show  the  suitableness  of  the  religion  to  co-operate  in  the 


Lect.  VIII.]  OF  CHRISTIANITY.  3^1 

point,  may  certainly  be  discerned  no  unfavourable 
augury  of  the  probable  operation  of  Christianity 
amid  future  revolutions  of  public  opinion  in  succeed¬ 
ing  ages.  Strengthened  from  within  by  its  own  Secukr- 

°  °  °  _  ization  not 

native  resources  of  influence,  it  may  be  expected  to  fatal  or  un- 
become  gradually  independent  of  all  such  means  or 
influence  as  governments  are  undoubtedly  capable 
of  exercising  upon  religious  belief,1  whether  bene¬ 
ficially  or  not. 

§  9.  An  argument  not  infrequently  urged  for  the 
probable  decline  of  Christianity  remains  to  be  con¬ 
sidered.  The  principle  of  private  judgment,  it  is  said,  flection 
in  matters  of  religion,  which  is  more  and  more  assert- 
ing  itself  in  reason  and  in  fact  as  the  law  of  Chris-  judgment 
tian  communities,  penetrating  even  the  armour  of 
Roman  unity,  is  a  principle  of  dissidence  and  divi¬ 
sion,  making  blunt  the  true  instrument  for  the  con¬ 
version  of  the  world, — Christian  love  and  oneness 
of  belief.  How,  it  is  objected,  is  mankind  to  be  ^theo- 
broiurht  over  to  the  Faith  of  Christ,  when  the  prin-  and  in  fact 

o  mcompa- 

cirfle  of  religious  disagreement  is  both  sanctioned  tibie  with 

-L  0  0  #  missionary 

and  maintained  ?2  Who  shall  judge  whether  this  success, 
disagreement  does  not  extend  to  matters  essential  to 

largest  speculations  as  to  the  ultimate  federation  of  mankind.  Comte 
admits  that  the  rise  of  industrial  Republics  in  the  Middle  Ages  is  a  proof 
that  Christianity  is  not  incompatible  with  this  form  of  government. — * 

Phil.  Pos .,  V.  458. 

1  See  on  this  subject  Sir  G.  C.  Lewis,  Influence  of  Authority ,  p.  291, 
and  Mr.  Lecky,  Hist.  Rat.,  II.  2-4. 

2  Comp. Voltaire,  Essai  sur  les  Mceurs ,  I.  iv.  “  Le  plus  grand  obstacle 
a  nos  succes  religieux  dans  l’Inde,  e’est  la  difference  des  opinions  qui 
divisent  nos  missionnaires ;  ”  &c. 


A  power 
of  conver¬ 
sion  an  ad¬ 
mitted  test 
of  the  vi¬ 
tality  of 
any  Re¬ 
ligion, 

not  ques¬ 
tioned  as 
to  Chris¬ 
tianity  in 
its  earlier 
stages. 


This  prin¬ 
ciple  and 
duty  in¬ 
herent  in 
the  system 
of  Chris¬ 
tianity. 


362  the  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 

personal  salvation?1  And,  at  any  rate,  if  the 
missionary  efforts  of  the  Church,  while  still  united, 
failed  to  procure  the  full  conversion  of  the  heathen 
to  the  knowledge  of  the  truth,  what  better  pro¬ 
spect  can  attend  the  labours  of  isolated  bodies  ?  If 
it  is  impossible  to  secure  unity  within  the  Church ; 
what  are  the  chances  of  succeeding  with  those 
“  that  are  without ;  ”  of  winning  to  the  One  Fold 
the  sheep  that  are  scattered  abroad  ?  It  has  been 
already  admitted  that,  in  the  tendency  of  any 
religious  system  to  extend  itself  by  conversion  of 
unbelief,  may  be  found  one  of  the  most  real  tests 
of  its  permanence,  power,  and,  ultimately,  of  its 
truth.2  No  objector  can  deny  to  certain  periods  of 
the  history  of  Christianity  the  presence  of  this 
test.  Those  periods  have  already,  in  the  course  of 
these  Lectures,  come  fully  under  review.  We  are 
now  led  to  form,  though  very  briefly,  an  estimate 
of  the  present  condition  and  ultimate  prospects  of 
our  Religion  in  respect  of  its  missionary  efforts. 

§  10.  But,  first,  it  must  not  be  forgotten,  as 
bearing  upon  this  portion  of  our  subject,  that  the 
missionary  spirit  of  Christianity,  as  compared  with 

1  This  objection,  it  is  clear,  may  be  carried  too  far.  All  errors,  even 
in  matters  of  faith,  cannot  be  considered  de  fide  and  heretical.  Roman 
Catholic  divines  admit  that  there  may  be  true  Churches  without  the 
entire  profession  of  the  truth  ;  nor  is  actual  unity  in  all  matters  of  faith 
a  real  note  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  See  Palmer,  Treatise ,  I.  v.  §  4. 
These  considerations  must  largely  modify  any  definition  of  “  Funda¬ 
mentals.” 

J  See  Grant,  Hampton  Ltd.,  vi.,  sub  init. 


363 


Lect.  VIII.]  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 

other  faiths,  was  marked  in  its  very  origin1  by  the 
example  and  action  of  its  Founder.  He  came,  as 
He  expressly  records,  u  to  scoJc  and  to  save  that 
which  was  lost.”  One  of  the  grandest  miracles 
of  this  Religion  and  of  its  most  important  announce¬ 
ments,  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the  Day 
of  Pentecost,  had  direct  reference  to  the  work  of 
Evangelization.2  In  some  respects  this  eagerness 
to  make  proselytes  might  he  considered  as  tradi¬ 
tional  with  the  Jews,  and  was  so  remarked  by 
heathen  writers  before  the  spread  of  Christianity.3 
In  some  respects,  also,  it  has  been  shared  by  other 
Eastern  religions,  by  the  faiths  of  Buddha4  and  Buddhism, 
Mahomet.  With  the  worshippers  of  Islam,  how- 
ever,  the  instrument  and  end  of  conversion  was  tan  faith, 
conquest ;  not  the  moral  or  spiritual  elevation  of 
the  believer.  They  massacred ;  they  did  not  con¬ 
vert.5  It  has,  indeed,  been  asserted  that  even  m  the 


1  On  the  real  and  disinterested  character  of  the  first  missionary 

labours  of  the  Christians,  see  Origen,  c.  Cels.,  III.  ix,  VIII  lii. ;  and  on 
tho  necessary  connection  between  such  efforts  and  a  belief  in  doctnne, 
comp.  Dr.  Mosley,  B.  h„  pp.  182-5.  “  Zeal  in  missionary  enterprise  is 

essentially  the  child  of  faith,”  &c.  We  may  set  proselytism  to  the 
account  of  Christianity  as  against  persecution.  “  Le  zele  qui  convertit 
et  qui  fonde  est  aussi  le  zele  qui  poursuit  et  qui  detruit.  —  Lutre, 
Lcs  Barbans,  p.  150.  See  Guizot,  Meditations,  II.  143. 

2  Comp.  Luke  xxiv.  47-49. 

3  Comp.  Neander,  I.  90-93,  ed.  Clark :  Bollinger,  Gentile  and  Jew, 

II.  181. 

4  See  Max  Miiller,  Chips,  I.  257,  293. 

6  “  Concerning  the  means  of  procuring  unity,  we  may  not  take  up 
the  third  sword,  which  is  Mahomet’s  sword  or  like  unto  it;  that  is,  to 
propagate  religion  by  wars,  or  by  sanguinary  persecutions  to  f°j,ce  con¬ 
sciences.” — Bacon,  Essays,  Works,  VI.  383.  It  is  too  true  that  the 


364 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 


Original 
with  the 
Christian 
religion, 


and  per¬ 
sistently 
carried 
out. 


present  day  Mahommedanism  still  makes  its  con¬ 
verts:1  a  result,  however,  obtained  by  secondary 
agencies,  such  as  the  institution  of  domestic  slavery, 
rather  than  by  any  combined  or  genuine  effort  to 
enlarge  the  area  of  its  beliefs.  But  with  the  Faith 
of  Jesus  Christ  conversion  of  unbelief  has  been 
from  the  first  an  intrinsic  and  palpable  duty.  “  Go 
ye  and  teach  all  nations  (/xa^reacrare) ;  baptizing 
them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,”  was  the  commission  of  His 
Apostles.  “  Out  of  all  nations  and  kindreds  and 
tongues  and  peoples  ”  was  ;His  Church  to  be  built 
up ;  and  “  unto  them  that  dwell  in  all  the  earth  ” 
was  “  the  everlasting  Gospel  ”  to  be  preached.2  Nor 
has  there  ever  been  any  long  space  in  the  history 
of  the  Church,  especially  when  freed  from  domestic 
struggles,  during  which  this  work  has  not  been 
carried  on  by  at  least  some  branch  of  the  Christian 
Communion.  No  age  has  been  altogether  without 
some  fruit  of  its  labours.  At  the  present  hour  it  is 
being  vigorously  and  honourably  maintained  :  and 
an  important  testimony  is  thus  rendered  to  the  life 
and  activity  of  our  Religion,  and  to  the  prospects  of 
its  extension  and  permanence.  A  few  proofs  in 


policy  of  Ferdinand  and  Isabella  to  Jew  and  Moor  was  a  copy  of  this 
example.— Milman,  Hist,  of  Jews,  III.  xxvi. ;  Gieseler,  III.  v.  §  6. 

1  See  W.  G.  Palgrave,  Essays  on  Eastern  Questions ,  p.  124 ;  also 
Bollinger,  Lectures  on  Reunion  of  Churches.  The  Church  Missionary 
Society’s  Report  for  1872  says,  “  In  some  parts  of  India  Mohamme¬ 
danism  is  extremely  strong,  if  not  increasing  ;  .  .  .  among  the  African 
tribes  it  continues  its  onward  movement.” 

2  Matt,  xxviii.  19 ;  Rev.  xiv.  6. 


Lect.  VIII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


365 


connection  with  this  part  of  our  subject  are  all  that 
can  be  given  here. 

§11.  At  the  time  of  the  Reformation  the  2;eo-  sketch  of 

0  .  0  missionary 

graphical  limits  of  the  Faith  of  Christ  were  for  the  efforts 

since  the 

most  part  identical  with  those  of  Europe.  Poland  Reforma- 
and  Lapland  had  at  length  received  the  Gospel;1 
and  although  Constantinople  had  admitted  within 
its  walls  its  Turkish  conquerors,  its  Christian  popu¬ 
lation  still  retained  one-half  of  the  churches  to  their 
use  with  liberty  of  worship.2  In  Asia  missionaries 
had  touched  China :  and  Nestorianism  had  made 
advances  in  Central  Tartary.  But  other  worlds 
now  opened  before  the  march  of  Christianity ;  and 
as  if  to  meet  the  fresh  demand,  the  nations  of  the  Evils  of 

the  con- 

West  rose  to  a  new  energy,  and  became  endued  with  quest  of 
greater  intensity  of  enterprise  and  purpose.3  It  is 
true  that  in  America  and  Western  Africa  the 
spread  of  the  Gospel  was  at  first  utterly  thwarted 
by  the  avarice  and  ferocity  of  the  Spaniards  and 
Portuguese.  What  else  could  be  looked  for  from 
men  who  had  mercilessly  expelled  from  the  soil 
of  Spain  the  Jew  and  the  Moor,  with  the  option  of 

1  Begun  in  tlie  middle  and  close  of  the  fourteenth  century,  but  it  was 
long  before  idolatry  was  extinguished. — Gieseler,  C.  H.,  IV.  259  ; 

Guericke,  Kirchengesch.,  II.  321 ;  Maclear,  Hist,  of  Missions  in  Middle 
Ages. 

2  Gibbon,  VIII.  180,  ed.  Smith. 

3  Comp.  Grant,  B.  L .,  p.  281.  Dr.  Dorner,  Hist.  Prot.  Th .,  II.  447, 
remarks  generally :  “  The  intensive  and  extensive  processes  alternate 
with  each  other  in  the  Church’s  history.  The  latter,  though  naturally 
arising  from  the  former,  brings  the  Church  into  a  defiling  contact  with 
the  world,  from  which  it  can  only  be  delivered  by  a  fresh  concentration 
and  a  recurrence  to  the  purifying  and  intensive  process.  Nevertheless, 
the  work  of  Christianity  upon  the  human  race  is  progressive.” 


366 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 


conversion  or  exile.1  In  vain  the  Dominicans  with 
righteous  rigour  refused  absolution  to  the  inhuman 
torturers  of  the  native  Indians.2  In  vain  the 
devoted  and  venerable,  if  mistaken,  Las  Casas  lived 
and  died  among  the  heathen  of  Mexico  and  Cuba. 

slave6  desire  to  palliate  these  enormities  any 

trade.  more  than  the  miseries  of  the  Slave  Trade,  that  long 
and  grievous  stain  on  the  fair  scutcheon  of  modern 
Christianity.  Yet  it  must  be  remembered  that  then, 
no  less  than  in  our  own  day,  the  social  element,  first 

causes  of  brought  into  c°ntact  with  savage  and  aboriginal 

these  re-  populations,  is  that  which  is,  for  the  most  part, 

least  under  the  control  of  religious  and  spiritual 
ideas.  The  missionary  succeeds  the  settler,  the 
slaver,  and  the  gold  seeker.  The  reproach  cast  by 
Lord  Bacon  on  his  contemporaries  in  the  days  of 
Elizabeth  would  hold  good  even  now.  u  Surely  the 
merchants  themselves  shall  rise  in  judgment  against 
the  princes  and  nobles  of  Europe.  For  they  have 
made  a  great  path  in  the  seas  unto  the  ends  of  the 
world  ;  and  set  forth  ships  and  forces  of  Spanish, 
English,  and  Dutch,  enough  to  make  China  trem¬ 
ble  ;  and  all  this  for  pearl,  or  stone,  or  spices ;  but 
for  the  pearl  of  the  kingdom  of  Heaven,  or  the 
stones  of  the  heavenly  Hierusalem,  or  the  spices  of 
the  Spouse’s  Garden,  not  a  mast  hath  been  set  up.” 3 

1  See  the  remarkable  discussion  given  in  Prescott  ( Ferdinand ,  III.  430) 
between  Sepulveda  and  Las  Casas.  “  The  Spaniard,”  says  the  indignant 
historian,  “  first  persecuted  the  Jews,  and  then  quoted  them  as  an  autho¬ 
rity  for  persecuting  all  other  infidels.”  See  also  Helps,  Las  Casas ,  c.  xi. 

2  Gieseler,V.  204.  Prescott,  w.s.,  III.  428.  Helps,  Life  of  Las  Casas,  c.  ix, 

3  Bacon,  Works,  VII.  19,  ed.  Spedding. 


Lect.  VIII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


3^ 

§  12.  And  yet  when  we  compare  the  three  Progress 
hundred  years  which  have  elapsed  since  the  era  of  large  and 
the  Reformation  with  the  fifteen  centuries  which  leaL 
had  preceded,  can  we  say  that  little  has  been  done 
or  is  doing  to  fulfil  the  great  Christian  duty  of 
propagating  the  Faith  ?  Little,  perhaps,  to  satisfy 
the  eager  expectation  which  calculates  (perchance 
too  fondly)  1  on  the  universal  spread  of  the  kingdom 
of  Christ,  ere  that  kingdom  be  accomplished  ;  ever 
crying,  “  How  long,  0  Lord  ?  ”  “  Wilt  thou  at 

this  time  restore  again  the  kingdom  to  Israel  ?  ” 

Little,  it  may  be,  to  answer  the  cavils  at  the  as¬ 
sumed  failure  and  unreason  of  all  missionary  efforts 
which  proceed  from  some  objectors  to  Revelation 
and  from  half-hearted  friends.2  Of  the  labours  of  Efforts  of 
the  Church  of  Rome  during  this  period  in  the  field  church?*1 
of  missions,  I  would  speak  with  all  respect.3  That 
Church,  which  sent  forth  a  Xavier  ;  which  fostered 
the  devotion  and  noble  self-sacrifice  of  the  Jesuit 
Fathers ;  which  (with  whatever  errors  of  concep¬ 
tion  and  execution)  has  planted  missions  through 

1  See  Archdeacon  Grant’s  observations,  B.  L.,  p.  301.  See  also  some 
good  remarks  in  Isaac  Taylor  (Hist,  of  Enthus.,  p.  183),  on  the  probable 
evils  which  would  accompany  a  speedy  conversion  of  mankind. 

2  Paley,  in  his  Evidences  (Works,  V.  239),  remarks  with  truth  that 
the  slow  progress  and  ill-success  of  modern  efforts  only  magnify  the 
miracle  of  the  first  conversion  of  the  Eoman  world  to  Christianity. 

3  The  Congregatio  de  fide  Cath.  propaganda  was  “  erected  ”  by  the 
Bull  of  Gregory  XV.  in  1622.  The  “  Seminarium  ”  dates  from  1627. 

As  to  the  Missions  here  touched  on,  Charlevoix’s  Histories  for  Japan 
and  Paraguay  are  well  known;  H.  Coleridge’s  Life  of  Xavier  may  also 
be  consulted  ;  and  for  a  general  account  of  Catholic  Missions,  Wittmann, 

Allgemeine  Geschichte  der  Katholisclien  Missionen ,  Vol.  III.  The  most 
recent  account  of  the  Mission  in  China  will  be  found  in  Cooper’s  Pioneer 
of  Commerce . 


Xavier. 


II  is  ex¬ 
ample 
capable  of 
reproduc¬ 
tion. 


3^8  THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 

the  length  and  breadth  of  America,  from  Paraguay 
to  the  snows  of  Canada  ;  no  less  than  in  the  far 
East,  in  India,  Tonkin,  China,  and  Japan,  and  on 
the  coasts  of  Western  Africa;  and  still  maintains 
with  unabated  vigour  in  much  of  these  regions,  as 
well  as  in  the  English  colonies,  its  centres  of  opera¬ 
tion  ;  is  no  sluggard  in  this  work.  Xavier  alone, 
in  his  heroic  faith  and  zeal,  his  quenchless  love  of 
souls,  his  entire  spirit  of  self-sacrifice,  his  earnest 
piety,  and  careful  wisdom,  offers,  it  has  been  well 
said,  “  all  that  we  can  desire,  all  that  we  can 
conceive  in  the  character  of  a  Christian  preacher 
sent  forth  among  the  heathen  to  teach  repentance 
toward  Grod,  and  faith  towards  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.”  1  Why  should  it  be  held  that  the  light  of 
such  an  example  is  perished  from  the  earth,  never 
to  re-illume  the  horizon  of  Christian  enterprise  ? 
Surely  it  cannot  any  longer  be  urged  with  truth 
against  Protestantism  that  in  its  hands  Christianity 
has  lost  its  expansive  power :  that  neither  the 
spirit  of  wisdom  nor  of  self-sacrifice  animates  its 
efforts  for  the  conversion  of  the  heathen.2  Long, 
it  is  true,  this  note  of  an  Apostolic  Church  was 
wanting  while  a  reformed  faith  was  struggling  for 
existence  or  reviving  its  shattered  energies.3  No 

1  Grant,  B.  L .,  p.  145. 

2  See  in  Grant,  u.  s.,  p.  183.  Thus  De  Maistre,  Du  Pape ,  III.  c.  i. ; 
IV.  v.  He  adds,  bitterly  :  “Les  eglises  sont  steriles,  et  rien  n’est  plus 
juste;  elles  out  rejete  l’Epoux.” 

3  “  The  constructive  intelligence  of  the  seventeenth  century  possessed 
itself  of  the  materials  accumulated  during  the  Reformation  era,  to 


Lect.  VIII  ] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


369 


doubt,  the  outbreak  of  the  Reformation  “  isolated  offthe 
the  English  Church  as  well  as  kindred  continental  Churches, 
bodies  from  the  vast  system  with  which  they  had 
been  bound  up.”1  They  were  thrown  suddenly  on 
their  own  resources.  But  little  by  little,  with  the 
return  of  strength  and  the  opportunity  of  reflection, 
the  sense  of  this  duty  re-awaked  among  the  Pro¬ 
testant  Churches.  Denmark  established  the  first 
mission  in  Hindostany  and  also  in  Greenland.  Germany. 
Holland  laboured  earnestly  in  Java,  Amboyna, 
Formosa.  Germany,  in  the  missions  of  the  United 
Brethren,  showed  an  unrivalled  pattern  of  wisdom 
and  self-devotion  over  an  area  extending  from 
South  Africa  to  Labrador.  I  will  not  now  seek  to 
recount  the  efforts  made  through  the  Missionary 
Societies  of  our  own  country  to  wipe  away  the  °f  |ns* 
reproach  of  past  indifference  in  this  the  prime  of 
Christian  works  of  mercy.  But  I  would  ask  you 
to  compare  the  present  state  of  British  India  with 
its  aspect  a  century  ago ;  to  look  abroad  on  the 
work  which  has  been  done  during  the  same  period 
in  America,  Australia,  New  Zealand,  and  Africa, 

fashion  them  into  means  of  offence  and  defence.  .  .  Within  the  citadel 
a  vigorous  spiritual  life,  which  gave  evidence  of  its  existence  chiefly  in 
sacred  song  and  music,  was  not  lacking.  But  the  notion  of  winning  the 
world  to  the  Gospel,  and  of  the  moral  expansion  of  the  Protestant  prin¬ 
ciple  according  to  its  different  aspects,  had  almost  disappeared.”— 

Dorner,  H.  Prot.  Th.,  II.  99. 

1  Grant,  B.  L.,  p.  185.  Guericke,  Kirchengesch .,  III.  374. 

2  Having  later  among  its  missionaries  (from  1751-1798)  that  truly 
excellent  man,  Christian  F.  Schwarz.  A  general  history  of  Protestant 
Missions  was  first  brought  out  by  Wiggers,  Hamburg,  1856,  in  2  vols. 

2  B 


Present 
aspect  of 
the  work. 


370  THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 

and  to  say  whether  we  can  see  in  it  only  the 
expiring  embers  of  a  faith  all  but  extinct,  in¬ 
capable  of  further  effort  or  enthusiasm.  Do  we 
not  rather  mark  in  it  the  signs  under  God’s  blessing 
of  a  revival,  pure,  and  fresh,  and  heartfelt,  of  a 
primitive  zeal  such  as  has  ever  stamped  the  leading 
eras  of  Christian  advance  ?  Though  much,  very 
much  remains  to  be  done  to  consolidate  the  empire 
of  Christ  even  in  the  regions  where  His  name  is 
named,  there  is  still  ground  in  past  and  present 
effort  for  the  highest  expectations  of  success.  Is  it 
not  so  that  in  these  latter  days  the  truest  seal  of 
missionary  devotion  has  not  been  withheld  in  the 
constancy  of  an  entire  Church,  as  also  of  individual 
Christians  ?  Witness  the  blood-stained  cliffs  of 
Madagascar !  Witness  the  island  of  the  South 
Pacific,  which  so  lately  saw  our  English  Bishop 
Patteson  close  with  a  martyr’s  death  the  life  of  an 
Apostle !  Happier  in  this  his  meed  than  Xavier 
himself.  “  If,”  said  that  faithful  servant  of  Christ, 
“  I  should  happen  to  die  by  the  hands  of  the 
heathen,  who  knows  but  all  of  them  might  receive 
the  faith  ?  For  it  is  most  certain  that,  since  the 
primitive  times  of  the  Church,  the  seed  of  the 
Gospel  has  made  a  larger  increase  in  the  fields 
of  Paganism  by  the  blood  of  martyrs  than  by  the 
sweat  of  missionaries.”1  Surely  Mission  work  will 
be  found  the  true  Crusade  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 


1  Sec  Dryden’s  Life,  p.  174,  ap.  Grant,  p.  179. 


Lect.  VIII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


371 


tury.  It  is  not  for  nought  that  Christianity,  once  Favour- 
the  civilizer  and  creator  of  modern  Europe,  now  j^STof 
puts .  forth  its  plastic  power  to  re-mould  the  stances" 
religions  of  the  world,  and  summon  to  one 
common  shrine  the  aboriginal  races  of  the  earth. 

It  is  true  that  many  such  tribes,  the  sad  survivors 
of  the  infancy  of  our  race,1  have  perished  as  by  an 
unseen  law,  and  are  perishing  at  the  first  touch  of 
civilization.  The  Church  of  Christ  but  plants 
itself  on  their  forgotten  graves.  Yet,  if  indeed 
we  believe  in  civilization  as  the  vocation  of  man¬ 
kind,  and  in  nations  as  specifically  gifted  for  this 
work,  how  vast  is  the  future  now  open  to  Chris¬ 
tian  enterprise!  For  the  soul  and  source  of  all  real 
civilization  we  hold  to  be  Religion.2  Colonization 
and  conquest,  intercourse  and  trade,  are  its 
pioneer  s,  and  to  each  of  the  dominant  sections  of 
the  Christian  world  may  perhaps,  in  the  Divine 
councils,  be  reserved  a  separate  portion  of  this 
common  work.  Each  of  the  three  Families  of Pr°i'arie 

field  open 

to  each  of 

“  Quant  aux  races  sauvages,  ces  tristes  survivants  (Tun  monde  en  w  Jpvf- 
enfance,  a  qui  l’on  ne  pent  souhaiter  qu’une  douce  mort,  il  y  a  presque  sionsofthe 
derision  a  leur  appliquer  nos  formulaires  dogmatiques,  fruit  d’une  christian 
reflexion  de  vingt  siecles.” — Feu  an,  Questions  < Contemporaines ,  p.  361.  dmrch- 
I  have  to  some  extent  followed  the  far-reaching  speculations  of  the  same 
able  mind  in  estimating  the  future  spread  of  Christianity.  Mean¬ 
while  philosophy,  it  must  not  he  forgotten,  has  done  nothing  in  this 
uoik.  Condorcet,  writes  De  Maistre,  “  nous  a  promis  que  les  philo- 
sophes  se  chargeraient  incessamment  de  la  civilisation  et  du  bonheur 
des  nations  barbares.  Nous  attendrons  qu’ils  veuillent  bien  com- 
mencer.” — (Euvres,  p.  130. 

2  See  Luthardt’s  remarks,  Apolog .,  E.  T.,  ed.  Clark,  p.  199. 

2  b  2 


372 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 


Christianity,1  the  Latin  or  Celtic,  the  Teutonic, 
the  Greco-Slave,  (for  in  accepting  this  new 
element  the  Greek  Church  also  has  found  its 
Renaissance ;)  has  at  least  a  probable  appointed 
area  of  labour.  Russia  may  yet  subdue  the  realms 
of  Buddhism  and  of  Confucianism.  For  Latin 
Catholicism  may  remain  the  Turkish  and  Persian 
Orient.  The  Moslems  of  the  East,  it  is  true,  fix 
their  gaze  on  Constantinople  as  the  centre  of  their 
hopes,2  looking  to  a  restoration  of  the  Caliphate, 
and  with  it  of  their  former  glory.  But  surely 
they  lean  on  a  broken  reed.  For  Teutonic 
Christianity  and  our  own  English-speaking  race 3 
lies  in  store  the  vast  appanage  of  Hindostan,  the 
continents  of  Australia  and  North  America,  and, 
as  it  would  seem,  of  Central  and  Southern  Africa, 

1  “  Throughout  the  world,  wherever  the  Teutonic  is  the  groundwork 

of  the  language,  the  Reformation  either  is  or,  as  in  Southern  Germany, 
has  been  dominant :  wherever  Latin,  Latin  Christianity  has  retained 
its  ascendancy.” — Milman,  L.  Chr .,  I.  8.  “  Protestantism,”  says  Mr. 

Froude,  Short  Studies ,  p.  131,  “  is  Teutonic ;  Catholicism  Latin  and 
Celtic.”  As  to  the  Greek  Church,  comp.  Dean  Stanley,  Lect.  on  Eastern 
Oh.,  p.  ix.  pp.  345,  492,  and  Neale’s  Iloly  Eastern  Church ,  I.  14,  15. 

2  See  Grant,  B.  L.,  p.  285.  W.  G.  Palgrave’s  Essays ,  p.  131. 

3  “  The  spread  of  the  English  stock,  and  language,  and  literature, 
over  the  Isorth  American  continent,  has  afforded  a  distinct  and  very 
significant  indication  of  the  power  of  Christianity  to  retain  its  hold 
ol  the  human  mind,  and  of  its  aptness  to  run  hand  in  hand  with 
civilization,  even  when  unaided  by  those  secular  succours  to  which 
its  enemies  in  malice,  and  some  of  its  friends  in  over-caution,  are  prone 
to  attribute  too  much  importance.” — I.  Taylor,  Enthus.,  p.  271.  In 
the  East,  the  opening  of  Japan,  the  adoption,  as  it  is  stated,  of  English 
as  the  State  language,  and  the  large  dimensions  of  Chinese  Coolie 
migration  to  America,  Australia,  and  India,  tend  in  the  same  direc¬ 
tion. 


I'ECT-  VIII.]  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


373 


“  even  all  the  isles  of  the  heathen.”  As  the  final  Room  for 
term  of  human  religions,  susceptible  of  a  pro-  Pr°SreSS' 
gressive  application,1  the  Avatar  of  Christianity 
has  still  before  it  a  future,  which  in  vastness  may 
overshadow  the  history  of  the  past.2 

§  13.  Let  us  not,  then,  the  creatures  of  a  day,  Conciu- 
whose  term  of  earthly  life  but  spans  the  commence-  Si°”’ 
ment  of  an  immortal  existence,  deem  that  progress 
slow,  that  career  uncertain.  For  what  shall  be  No  true 
our  standard  of  measurement  ?  “  The  blindness  of  o“te 
the  greatest  men,  of  the  highest  races,  of  wideofSST5 
continents”  will  not  shake  our  faith,  that  the tianity’ 
Divine  purpose  revealed  in  the  scheme  of  our  holy 
Religion  shall  surely  come  to  pass.  There  are  not 
v  anting  indications  that,  “  both  in  the  case  of  men 
and  of  nations,  the  longest  training  and  the 
dreariest  periods  of  abeyance  of  spiritual  lire  are 
often  preparations  for  its  fullest  growth.”3  Eras  of 

1  Comp.  Milman,  u.  s.,  p.  9 ;  VI.  447. 

Want  of  space  forbids  me  to  dwell  on  the  symptoms,  now  happily 
universal,  of  the  intensive  progress  of  Christianity  in  our  own  and  other 
countries.  These  to  some  extent  compete  and  interfere  with  missionary 
labour.  Such  are  the  vast  efforts  made  in  England  during  the  last  half 
century  not  only  by  the  Established  Church,  but  also  by  Nonconformist 
bodies,  to  overtake,  as  to  spiritual  provision,  the  large  and  steady  increase 
of  population,  a  task  the  more  difficult  from  foregone  neglect ;  the  build¬ 
ing  and  renovation  of  churches  and  chapels ;  the  erection  and  main¬ 
tenance  of  schools  in  which  the  clergy  are  admitted  to  have  taken 
so  great  a  share;  the  growing  interest  in  matters  of  doctrine  and  prac- 
tice  often  involving  much  personal  sacrifice;  not  to  speak  of  individual 
acts  ot  Christian  religiousness,  the  growth  of  charity  answering  to  the 
increase  of  national  wealth.  In  proportion  as  many  of  these  tasks  are 
remitted  to  the  superintendence  of  the  State,  the  extensive  action  of  the 
Church  may  be  expected  to  fill  a  larger  field. 

7  Hutton,  Essays ,  p.  122. 


374 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 


Retrogres-  apparent  retrogression  may  be  designed  to  act  but 
diary  to  as  goads  to  discipline  the  faith  which  hopes  and 
works  unshaken  to  the  end.  And  certainly  the 
new  consciousness  now  dawning  on  mankind  of 
spaces  of  duration,  hitherto  beyond  conception,  yet 
now  falling  into  their  rank  and  place  in  the  scheme 
of  evolution  of  human  existence,  may  teach  us  to  be 
wary  of  hastily  determining  the  future  of  Chris¬ 
tianity  and  of  our  race  by  any  previous  limits  of 
anticipation.  It  has  probably  been  one  cause  of 
the  slowness  of  the  spread  of  the  Gospel,  now, 
happily,  very  generally  felt,  where  over-hasty  mis- 
Progress  sionary  efforts  have  neglected  all  consideration  of 

in  know-  ^  0 

ledge  will  previous  stages  of  development,  intellectual  and 

facilitate  1  &  i 

missionary  moral ;  and  have  introduced  races  hardly  reclaimed 

success. 

from  savagery  to  theological  controversies,  or  the 
acceptance  of  religious  practices,  which  represent 
the  thought  of  centuries.  But  the  issue  of  the 
work  of  Evangelization  can  never  be  doubtful,  so 
long  as  we  reflect  upon  the  characteristics  of  the 
truths  which  Christianity  reveals  to  mankind,  and 
Argument  their  position  in  the  history  of  our  race.  In  this 
progress  respect  we  may,  without  undue  assumption,  appeal 
mate  per-  to  the  internal  evidence  of  truth  furnished  by  the 
of^chris-  character  of  its  doctrines ;  their  universality,1  their 

tianity, 

1  “  There  is  nothing  which  to  any  reflecting  mind  is  more  signal  a 
proof  of  the  Bible  being  really  the  guiding  book  of  the  world’s  history 
than  its  anticipations,  predictions,  insight  into  the  wants  of  men  for 
beyond  the  age  in  which  it  was  written.  That  modern  element  which 
we  find  in  it — so  like  our  own  times,  so  unlike  the  ancient  framework 
of  its  natural  form — that  Gentile,  European  turn  of  thought,  so 


Lect.  VIII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


375 


adaptation  to  the  nature  which  it  is  their  aim  to 
regenerate ;  their  very  presumption  of  finality  in 
the  promises  which  they  hold  out  to  assure  the 
spirit  of  man.  Other  religions  have  been  local,  from  the 
temporary,  limited,  fitted  for  definite  stages  of  tan  charac- 
culture,  partial  in  their  hold  upon  particular  doctrines, 
truths,  in  accord  with  the  spiritual  standing,  so  to 
speak,  only  of  the  people  or  race.  They  have  accord¬ 
ingly  developed  tribes  and  nations  to  a  fixed  line 
and  point  of  progress,  and  then  their  course  seems 
stayed.1  They  have  no  further  message  to  the 
soul  of  man ;  no '  onward  mission  to  evoke  his 


Divine  capacities,  or  renew  his  fallen  nature.  But  which  find 
Christianity  has  not  only,  in  its  history,  shown  ment  in 

the  deve- 

itself  adeq  uate  to  all  the  circumstances  of  its  de-  lopment 

of  the 

human 

unlike  the  Asiatic  language  and  scenery  which  was  its  cradle — the  race- 
enforcement  of  principles  and  duties  which  for  years  and  centuries 
lay  almost  unperceived,  because  hardly  ever  understood  in  its  'sacred 
pages ;  but  which  now  we  see  to  be  in  accordance  with  the  utmost 
requirements  of  philosophy  and  civilization ;  those  principles  of  tole¬ 
ration,  chivalry,  discrimination,  proportion,  which  even  now  are  not 
appreciated  as  they  ought  to  be,  and  which  only  can  be  realized  in 
ages  yet  to  come ;  these  are  the  unmistakeable  predictions  of  the 
prophetic  spirit  of  the  Bible,  the  pledges  of  its  inexhaustible  re¬ 
sources.” — Stanley,  Sermons  on  the  Bible ,  p.  80.  I  shall  readily  be 
excused  for  quoting  this  fine  passage  at  length. 

1  “  History  shows  in  many  ways  that  Mahometanism  has  its  root 
only  in  the  past.  There  is  no  growth  in  the  faith  ;  no  power  of 
adapting  itself  to  the  new  ages.  Mahomet  as  he  was  rules  Maho¬ 
metans  as  they  are.  His  word  was  petrified  and  crystallized  in 
Mecca,  and  can  assimilate  no  new  truth.  But  the  history  of  the 
Christian  Church  is  a  history  of  constant  growth  in  spite  of  sacer¬ 
dotal  resistance ;  and  1  believe  that  the  upward  course  of  that  growth 
has  ever  been  the  communion  with  a  living  Christ.” — Hutton,  Essays , 

I.  277. 


376 


THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 


Its  tenets 
responsive 
to  the 
highest 
convic¬ 
tions  of 
civiliza¬ 
tion, 


of  Moral 
Science, 


velopment;  its  definite  announcements  permit  a 
judgment  on  its  genius  and  character  as  a  Religion 
framed  for  permanence  and  finality.1  If  true,  it 
proclaims  a  scheme  for  the  redemption  and  im¬ 
provement  of  mankind,  which  is  unique,  complete, 
and  incapable  of  repetition.  Its  overtures  to  the 
individual  soul,  limited  to  no  race,  or  caste,  or 
class,  or  set  of  faculties,  extend  from  its  entrance 
into  life  to  the  hour  of  departure ;  are  adapted  to  its 
real  wants  and  failings  ;2  and  provide  for  that 
immortality  which  strikes  an  answering  chord  in 
the  heart  of  every  man.  Its  type  of  moral  per¬ 
fection,  correspondent  to  the  actual  phenomena  of 
human  nature,  is  laid  in  the  union  of  opposed  yet 
not  discordant  virtues,  of  impulsive  affections  and 
controlled  passions,  of  self-sacrifice  identical  with 
the  truest  self-love,  and  terminating  in  the  restora¬ 
tion  of  real  self-respect.  “  He  who  saves  his  life 

1  Compare  H.  J.  Rose,  Prot.  in  Germany ,  pp.  191, 192. 

2  On  these  topics  see  Miller’s  Pampton  Lect.  oil  the  Adaptation  of 
Holy  Scripture  to  the  real  state  of  Human  Nature;* more  particularly 
Lectures  iv.  and  vii.  “  There  never  was  any  religion  as  that  of  Christ ; 
so  congenial  to  our  highest  instincts;  so  persuasive,  so  ennobling,  so 
universally  acceptable  to  rich  and  poor ;  so  worthy  of  the  intellect,  so 
consistent  and  uncompromising  in  its  rules  for  advancing  moral  excel¬ 
lence.  Men  could  not,  would  not  turn  from  it  if  it  was  properly 
brought  home  to  them;  if  it  was  not  tendered  to  them  with  some 
admixture  of  earth  about  it,  exciting  their  suspicions  and  robbing  it 
of  its  heavenly  fragrance.” — Ffoulkes,  Div.  of  Christendom ,  p.  xiv. 
“  Many,  I  think,  are  agreed,  that  after  all  the  most  striking  evidence 
for  the  Divine  origin  of  our  faith  lies  in  the  patent  fact  of  its  existence ; 
of  its  growth  and  diffusion ;  its  proved  superiority  to  all  other  forms 
of  spiritual  thought  ;  its  proved  adaptation  to  all  the  spiritual  wants 
of  man.” — Merivale,  Lcctt.,  p.  6 ;  and  Northern  Nations ,  p.  28. 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


Lect.  VIII.] 


shall  lose  it :  but  whosoever  shall  lose  his  life  for 


Jesus’  sake  and  the  Gospel,  the  same  shall  save 
it.”1  The  term  of  man’s  moral  progression  is  by 
its  means  indefinitely  extended,  and  rises  into  a  and  to  the 

fciots  and 

new  and  nobler  sphere  than  that  of  ordinary  ethics.  needs  of 
It  alone  assuages  the  sorrows  of  existence,  (from  nature  as 
which  ere  now  philosophy  has  taken  refuge  in  developed. 
suicide),2  hallows  and  explains  the  mystery  of 
suffering,  and  takes  away  the  sting  of  dissolution. 

Its  revelations,  while  confessedly  beyond  intellec¬ 
tual  comprehension,  are  guaranteed  by  their  corre¬ 
spondence  with  the  spiritual  intuitions  of  our  race ; 
being  acknowledged  alike  by  the  richest  culture 
and  by  the  lowest  barbarism.  Man’s  wants  and 
weaknesses,  his  hopes  and  desires,  his  powers  and 
aspirations,  his  personal  and  social  capabilities,  are 


together  forestalled.  Thus  the  doctrines  of  Chris¬ 
tianity,  uniting  the  human  and  Divine,  make  the 
only  adequate  provision  for  the  claims  of  the 
human  spirit  in  its  sense  of  sinfulness  and  need  of 
reconciliation,  in  its  yearning  after  Divine  COm-  Scriptural 

°  provision 

for  the 

1  Mark  viii.  35.  Christianity  is  plainly  in  accord  with  that  higher 

aspect  of  Utilitarian  Morality  which  teaches  that  a  man  is  bound  to  live  mankind 
in  harmony  with  the  order  of  the  universe,  and  contribute  his  part  to 
the  common  good.  Again,  each  soul  of  man  is  “  one  for  whom  Christ 
died”  (Rom.  xiv.  15).  “  Magnum  opus  Dei  es,  Homo,”  says  Ambrose, 

Serm.  x.  in  Ps.  118,  §  11. 

2  See  Archer  Butler,  Lect.  on  Ancient  Phil.,  I.  443, 459 ;  (it  was  prac* 
tised  by  Zeno  and  Cleanthes,  the  Stoics ;)  and  Mr.  Lecky,  H.  E.  M ., 

II.  46,  for  the  history  of  Christian  influence  on  this  point.  Buckle, 

Hist.  Civ.,  I.  26,  remarks  on  the  fruitlessness  of  legislation  to  stay  this 
evil. 


a  per¬ 
manent 
system. 


No  real 
decay  of 
the  power 
or  benevo' 
lence  of 
the  Gos¬ 
pel. 


37S  THE  PERMANENCE  [Lect.  VIII. 

munion.1  For,  by  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Grhost, 
assured  through  ordained  means  of  reception, 
man’s  spirit  is  associated  with  his  Maker  and 
Redeemer,  and  life  in  time  with  life  in  eternity. 
Thus  the  Ideal  merges  in  the  Actual,  the  Visible  in 
the  Unseen,  and  Earth  in  Heaven.  Raised  above  an 
atmosphere  of  chill  Materialism,  the  Christian 
walks  and  lives  in  a  world  where  things  are  no 
longer  what  they  seem  ;  but  glow  with  a  new  light, 
and  are  suffused  with  a  deeper  significance. 

Largior  hie  campos  tether  et  lumine  vestit 

Purpureo :  solemque  suum,  sua  sidera  norunt. 

A  door  is  opened  in  Heaven  ;  and  he  hears  the 
Voice  which  saith,  “  Come  up  hither.” 

§  13.  And  it  is  of  this  Religion  that  we  are 
bidden  to  believe,  that  it  is  fraught  with  the  fate  of 
bygone  superstitions,  stricken  with  palsy,  hasten¬ 
ing  to  decay.  Although  day  by  day  it  gives  evi¬ 
dence  of  the  living  fruits  of  faith,  and  zeal,  and 
charity,  of  a  benevolence  well-nigh  boundless,  of  a 
sympathy  universal  as  our  race.2  Surely  the  love 
which  has  done  so  much  for  man,  is  no  unreal 

1  “  The  Gospel,  as  mere  historical  truth,  would  he  something  past 
and  dead,  like  a  mere  doctrinal  system  of  eternal  truths,  without  life 
and  reference  to  the  living  person.  It  is  the  nature  of  the  Gospel  that  it 
is  truly  known  and  apprehended  only  when  the  historical  Christ  is  at 
the  same  time  embraced  as  the  present,  as  well  as  the  eternally  abiding, 
and  therefore  also  future  Christ ;  as  still  livingly  active  to-day,  and 
pointing  forward  into  the  depths  of  an  eternity  whose  vital  energies 
repose  in  Him.” — Dorner,  Hist.  Prot.  Th .,  I.  232. 

2  See  Mr.  Lecky’s  eloquent  testimony,  1 list,  licit. y  I.  204,  205 ;  and 
compare  Lange,  Gesch.  dcs  McUeriulismus,  p.  55G. 


Lect.  VIII.] 


OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


37  9 


sentiment ;  it  has  its  root  in  the  truth  of  things ;  The 
it  is  an  effluence  from  Him,  Who  Himself  is  Christ, 
revealed  as  Love,  in  the  person  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  ?he  fact*1 
express  Image  of  Divine  Holiness,  the  Channel  of  miseT 
Divine  Grace,  the  Author  and  Example  of  all  true  dwelling 
self-sacrifice.  “  They  who  would  deprive  mankind  necessarily 
ot  Him,  would  tear  out  the  corner-stone  of  the EternaL 
noblest  edifice  of  humanity.”1  But  this  they  can 
never  do.  And  in  the  darkest  hour  of  human 
degradation  and  depression,  the  word  of  promise 
standeth  sure,  having  this  seal :  64  It  is  I,  be  not 
afraid :  ”  44  Lo  !  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto 
the  end  of  the  world.”2  Amen. 

1  Luthardt,  Apolog .,  p.  297 :  “  As  little  as  mankind  will  ever  be 
without  religion,  so  little  will  they  ever  he  without  Christ — an  his¬ 
torical,  not  a  mythical  Christ — an  individual,  not  a  mere  symbol. 

Christ  remains  to  us,  as  the  highest  we  know  and  are  capable  of 
imagining  within  the  sphere  of  religion — as  He  without  whose  presence 
in  the  mind  perfect  piety  is  impossible.” — Strauss,  Soliloquies ,  67 
(quoted  by  Dean  Stanley,  Sermons ,  p.  111).  See  Mr.  Hutton,  Essays , 

1.  278. 

2  Matt.  xiv.  27,  xxviii.  20.  So  Luther  had  good  reason  to  liken  the 
Church  of  Christ  to  the  amaranth,  which  neither  withers  nor  decays. 

“  Sprinkled,”  he  said,  “  with  water,  it  becomes  fresh  and  green  once 
more,  as  if  raised  and  wakened  from  the  dead.  Even  so  is  the  Church 
by  God  raised  and  wakened  as  out  of  the  grave.  For  though  tem¬ 
poral  empires,  principalities,  and  kingdoms  have  their  changings — and, 
like  flowers,  soon  fall  and  fade  away — this  Kingdom,  so  deeply  rooted, 
by  no  power  can  be  destroyed  or  wasted,  but  remains  eternally.” — 

1  able- Talk,  172,  ed.  Bohn.  “Wherefore,  being  Christ  doth  promise 
His  Presence  unto  the  Church  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world  ;  He 
doth  thereby  assure  us  of  the  existence  of  the  Church  until  that  time, 
ot  which  His  Presence  is  the  cause.” — Pearson,  on  the  Creed ,  Art.  ix. 


• 

' 

*» 

• 

- 


INDEX 


A. 

Administration,  Divine,  harmony 
of,  127. 

Admiration  has  a  personal  basis, 
232. 

Altruism  not  incompatible  with 
Christianity,  82,  377. 

Anabaptists,  their  fanaticism  not 
due  to  the  principles  of  the  Re¬ 
formation,  329. 

Analogy  of  Nature,  a  theological 
ground  of  argument,  212. 

Antiquity  no  actual  test  of  truth, 
28. 

Arabians,  their  services  to  physical 
science,  350. 

Aristotle,  his  medieval  reputation, 
247; 

Art,  its  early  relation  to  Christi¬ 
anity,  280;  its  present  position, 
348. 

Asceticism  not  essential  to  the  theo¬ 
logical  spirit,  299. 

Asylum,  privilege  of,  289. 

Augsburg,  Confession  of,  its  con- 
.  eluding  declaration,  332. 

Augustine,  S.,  his  view  of  miracles 
as  evidential,  139. 

B. 

Bacon,  Lord,  on  religious  contro¬ 
versy,  11;  his  view  of  missions, 
356. 

Barbarians  readily  admitted  by  the 
Church,  281 ;  mode  of  conversion, 
286  ;  its  true  causes,  288. 

Barbaric  Codes,  show  the  influence 
of  Christianity,  284. 


Becket  habitually  performed  harvest 
work,  300. 

Belief,  Christian,  standard  of,  in 
Scripture  and  Creeds,  31. 

Biography,  Religious,  importance  of, 
228. 

Bishops,  popular  election  of,  280 ; 
by  royal  mandate,  285;  their 
beneficial  influence,  283,  288. 

Bossuet,  his  argument  against  Pro¬ 
testantism  lies  equally  against 
Christianity,  11. 

Brahmanism,  stationary,  26, 27,  29  ; 
its  doctrine  of  Absorption,  30. 

Buckle,  Henry  T.,his  obligations  to 
Condorcet,  71 ;  his  views  on  civi¬ 
lization,  146  ;  on  theology,  208  ; 
confounds  asceticism  with  self- 
restraint,  299. 

Buddhism,  26,  27 ;  once  a  mis¬ 
sionary  religion,  29,  363;  extin¬ 
guished  caste,  30;  favours  Mon- 
asticism,  297,  298. 

Butler,  Archer,  on  doctrinal  develop¬ 
ment,  45. 

Butler,  Bishop,  14,  20,  188,  212, 
219. 

C. 

Calvin,  his  doctrine  of  personal 
assurance,  331. 

Casuistry,  its  moral  value,  166. 

Catholicism,  Medieval,  its  declen¬ 
sion,  326. 

Causes  distinguished  from  occasions 
of  events,  134. 

Chance  equivalent  to  ignorance  of 
design,  77. 


382 


INDEX. 


Chivalry,  its  relation  to  Medieval 
Christianity,  311 ;  its  origin,  ib. 

Christ,  Jesus,  perennial  influence  of 
His  example,  35,  334. 

Christianity,  most  vigorous  in  the 
most  civilized  regions,  3  ;  a  factor 
in  civilization ;  8,  152,  308 ;  a 
fact  of  long  standing,  9  ;  its  dura¬ 
bility  ascertainable,  23 ;  its  anti¬ 
quity,  28 ;  an  historical  and  docu¬ 
mentary  religion,  34,  64,  212; 
the  religion  of  progress,  51,  220  ; 
its  perpetuity  a  doctrinal  tenet, 
52,  56,  57,  264,  379  ;  its  assumed 
failure,  58 ;  as  being  a  phase  of 
religion,  60 ;  not  a  necessary 
result  only  of  antecedents,  144, 
180 ;  its  progress,  how  far  super¬ 
natural,  145,  265;  natural,  162; 
limited,  169,  171  ;  in  advance  of, 
yet  co-existent  with,  civilization, 
172,  242  ;  importance  of  its  ideal 
standard,  173 ;  did  not  originate 
in  a  moral  protest,  169 ;  not 
eclectic,  177 ;  is  not  a  new  code  of 
morals,  257  ;  has  not  declined  in 
moral  effect,  175  ;  its  part  in  ad¬ 
vancing  morals,  170,  176 ;  its 
slow  progress  not  due  to  feeble¬ 
ness,  188,  373 ;  has  survived 
changes  of  opinion,  203  ;  theories 
of  its  origin,  261,  275 ;  true 
causes  of  its  success,  262,  266, 
268,  273;  its  moral  power,  269, 
272,  276;  its  services  wrongly 
attributed  to  positive  institutions, 
274 ;  founded  on  a  sense  of  sin, 
276  ;  its  early  influence  on  litera¬ 
ture,  281 ;  intellectual  services  in 
Middle  Ages,  193 ;  .  its  politi¬ 
cal  affinities,  359  ;  whether  demo¬ 
cratic,  360;  internal  evidence  of 
its  permanence,  375,  376;  its 
benevolence,  378. 

Christians,  moral  excellence  of  the 
first,  263. 

Church,  The,  temporal  supremacy 
of,  185. 

Circumstances,  their  coincidence  ad¬ 
mits  of  no  law,  129. 

Civilization,  multiform,  not  a  mere 
intellectual  advance,  146,  147 ; 


answers  to  the  whole  nature  of 
man,  149  ;  difference  of  Ancient 
and  Modern,  148. 

Classicism,  its  effects  on  Christianity, 
346,  348. 

Communism,  early  view  of,  in  the 
Church,  187. 

Confucius,  his  view  of  Providence, 
125 ;  of  religion,  178,  257. 

Consciousness,  testimony  of,  analo¬ 
gous  to  perception,  106. 

Constantine  established  Christianity, 
277  ;  its  consequences,  278. 

Controversy  a  sign  of  religious  acti¬ 
vity,  11. 

Conversion,  power  of,  an  element 
in  religious  vitality,  26,  253, 
362 ;  essential  to  Christianity, 
363. 

Creeds,  how  connected  with  Scrip¬ 
ture,  37,  38;  independent  form 
of,  358. 

Cromwell,  Oliver,  cause  of  his  death, 
131. 

Crusades,  The,  criticisms  of,  304 ; 
really  defensive,  ib. ;  their  services 
to  civilization,  305  ;  their  spiritual 
import,  306  ;  exhibit  the  heroic 
type  of  Christianity,  307  ;  later 
Crusades,  315. 

Cycles,  theory  of,  in  history,  131. 

D. 

Deduction,  its  character  as  an  in¬ 
strument  of  proof,  215,  216. 

Design,  Argument  from, not  identical 
with  order,  22. 

Development,  Theory  of,  its  influ¬ 
ence  on  the  perpetuity  of  Christian 
doctrine,  42 ;  dubiously  admitted, 
ib. ;  rests  on  authority,  43  ;  really 
an  historical  process,  44 ;  Rational¬ 
istic  theoty  of,  46. 

Discovery  in  Natural  Science  a 
species  of  Revelation,  217. 

Distance  of  time  necessary  to  clear 
judgment,  9. 

Dominicans,  their  humane  efforts, 
366. 

Durability,  test  of,  in  religions,  26. 
i  Duration  a  relative  idea,  23. 


INDEX . 


383 


E. 

Eastern  Church,  its  failings,  170 ; 
its  subordination  to  the  Greek 
Emperors,  285  ;  its  Monachism, 
298  ;  its  future,  372. 

Effectual  Call,  sense  of,  in  theology, 

101. 

Epicureanism,  modern,  traceable  in 
the  view  of  Laws  of  Nature, 

115. 

Erasmus,  his  complaints,  346. 

Error,  slow  extension  of,  15. 

Establishments,  Church,  usefulness 

^  of,  357,  358. 

Evangelical  Preparation,  truth  and 
importance  of,  144. 

Evil,  existence  of,  explained  by 
partial  knowledge,  20 ;  nature 
of  moral  and  physical,  245 ;  mode 
of  its  extinction,  246. 


Faith  the  basis  of  all  scientific 
acquirement,  240. 

Fatalism  contradicted  by  conscious¬ 
ness,  102. 

Feudalism,  its  relation  to  Medieval 
Christianity,  309  ;  its  origin,  310. 

Final  Causes,  fallacy  of  assuming, 
19,  21. 

Free  Will,  in  what  respects  a  theo¬ 
logical  tenet,  79 ;  compatible  with 
physical  uniformity,  80. 

French  Revolution,  its  intolerance, 
344. 

Froude,  J.  A.,  his  view  of  Calvinism, 
80  ;  of  General  Laws,  136. 

G. 

General  Laws,  personification  of, 
by  recent  writers,  136 

Gibbon,  his  view  of  the  success  of 
Christianity,  261;  inadequate,  262. 

Gladiatorial  shows,  extinguished  by 
Christianity,  271. 

Greek  nature  controversial,  169. 

Gregory  the  Great,  synchronizes 
with  the  final  Christianization  of 
Europe,  284 ;  his  view  of  Purga¬ 
tory,  319. 


H. 

Hegelianism,  its  essence,  353. 

History  sometimes  confounded  with 
biography,  135. 

Hospitals,  a  Christian  institution, 
271. 

Humanists  at  the  Reformation,  347  ; 
their  servility,  354. 

I. 

Ideas  gain  credence  from  repetition, 
6L 

Induction  not  excluded  by  theo¬ 
logy,  208  ;  unknown  to  antiquity, 
351. 

Infanticide,  a  Pagan  custom,  271. 

Inquisition,  The,  how  a  means  to 
toleration  of  opinion,  139. 

Instincts,  existence  and  testimony 
of,  82,  85  ;  imply  design,  84. 

Investiture,  Right  of,  315. 

J. 

Justification  by  Faith  only,  Lu¬ 
ther’s  view  of,  327 ;  its  relation 
to  the  Reformation,  328. 

K. 

Kant,  on  design  in  Nature,  23. 

Kepler,  his  view  of  planetary  spirits, 
136. 

Knowledge  being  positive,  finite  in 
character,  249. 

L. 

Las  Casas,  his  devoted  life,  366. 

Laws  of  Nature,  wrongly  identified 
with  a  theory  of  Existence,  103 ; 
meaning  of  General  Laws,  115  ; 
views  as  to  their  nature,  118  ;  not 
yet  proved  to  be  universal,  120 ; 
by  some  held  to  be  the  term  of 
knowledge,  122. 

Leibnitz,  his  theory  of  Parallelism, 
93. 

Love  to  God,  an  essentially  Christian 
precept,  165. 


INDEX. 


384 


Luther,  his  vehemence,  328  ;  efforts 
for  education,  347 ;  view  of  the 
permanence  of  Christianity,  379. 

Lyranus  Nicolaus,  his  Postillce  per¬ 
petual,  329. 

M. 

Mahometanism,  26,  27  ;  its  present 
progress,  363,  372,  375. 

Man,  how  superior  to  the  animals, 
109. 

Mansel,  Dean,  his  view  of  Divine 
interposition,  133. 

Marathon,  religious  importance  of 
this  victory,  135. 

Marriage,  Christian  view  of,  271. 

Martyrs  in  Science  as  in  Religion, 
197. 

Materialism,  its  connection  with 
Positivism,  68 ;  incompatible 
with  ignorance  of  physical  causes, 
91 ;  its  gloomy  character,  222  ; 
its  present  aspect,  244. 

Matter,  not  eternal,  90 ;  warrants  in¬ 
ference  of  the  existence  of  God,  95. 

Medieval  Christianity,  its  corrup¬ 
tions,  313,  355  ;  inevitable,  314  ; 
its  military  character,  315 ;  cor¬ 
ruptions  of  doctrine,  317  ;  false 
supports,  320 ;  extravagance,  349  ; 
suppression  of  criticism,  351 ;  its 
liberality,  360. 

Melancthon,  323,  327,  347. 

Method  of  Residues  applicable  to 
History,  128. 

Middle  Ages,  their  religious  charac¬ 
ter,  173. 

Miracles,  classification  of,  138. 

Missions,  whether  incompatible  with 
Private  Judgment,  361 ;  prospects 
of,  362,  370  ;  early  recognition  of, 
363  ;  continuous,  364  ;  their  pro¬ 
gress  since  the  Reformation,  365, 
3 66,  368. 

Monasticism,  Christian,  its  origin, 
297  ;  a  remedy  to  excessive  indus¬ 
trialism,  299  ;  involved  labour, 
300;  merits  of,  301 ;  its  defects, 
302  ;  self-regenerative  power,  303. 

Monotheism,  its  relation  to  Christi¬ 
anity,  85. 


Morality  truly  progressive,  163, 164 ; 
advanced  by  Christianity,  165  ; 
Christian  morality  the  corollary  of 
its  doctrines,  178 ;  distinguished 
from  Religion,  258. 

Mysteries,  essential  to  Religion  as  re¬ 
vealed,  141 ;  economy  of  Christi¬ 
anity  in  respect  of,  141. 

Mysticism,  the  correlative  of  Ration¬ 
alism,  142  ;  its  relation  to  Mate¬ 
rialism,  142. 

N. 

Natural  Science, its  prepossessions 
as  to  Theology,  63  ;  these  histori¬ 
cally  justified,  66  ;  present  Mate¬ 
rialistic  tendencies  of,  67,  76 ; 
easily  passes  into  dogmatism,  69. 

Nature,  uniformity  of,  tends  to  a  First 
Cause,  88 ;  exhibits  also  variety 
and  irregularity,  130. 

Neo-Platonism,  its" failure,  237. 

Nescience,  Philosophy  of,  often  tends, 

.  though  not  necessarily,  to  Mate¬ 
rialism,  97,  117. 

Newton,  Sir  Isaac,  on  the  Nature  of 
God,  137. 

Numbers  no  test  of  truth  in  Reli¬ 
gion,  27. 

O. 

Origen,  his  view  of  planetary  spirits, 
136. 

Orphanages,  when  first  founded, 

271. 

P. 

Paganism,  inefficient  as  a  religion, 
27  ;  its  reaction  upon  Christianity, 

171. 

Pantheism,  essence  of,  96  ;  its  anti¬ 
dote,  ib. 

Papacy,  spiritual  function  of,  as  a 
tribunal  of  appeal,  291 ;  decline 
of,  316  ;  its  moral  dignity,  316. 

Pascal,  his  view  of  Prophecy,  139. 

Patriotism  recognized  by  Jesus 
Christ,  81 ;  a  Christian  virtue, 
360. 

Patteson,  Bishop,  his  death,  370. 

Penitentials,  their  influence  as  part 
of  Christian  Law,  291. 

Permanence,  a  test  of  reality,  13. 


INDEX. 


385 


Perpetuity,  a  test  of  religious  truth,  6. 

Persecution  for  belief,  its  origin, 
184,  356. 

Physical  Studies  not  irreligious 
where  not  exclusive,  116 ;  ancient 
cultivation  of,  350;  indebted  to 
Protestantism,  356. 

Platonism,  its  share  in  the  Reforma¬ 
tion,  323. 

Plinjq  his  view  of  Prayer,  267. 

Positive,  history  of  the  term,  67. 

Positivism  assumes  all  religious  be¬ 
lief  to  be  imaginary,  16  ;  a  belief 
in  Laws,  59  ;  negative  in  its  ten¬ 
dencies,  66 ;  defective  as  an  ex¬ 
planation  of  phenomena,  97  ;  its 
relation  to  Free  -Will,  108 ;  its 
failure  as  a  religion,  237  ;  its  his¬ 
torical  criticism  of  Christianity, 
320  ;  confounds  Christianity  with 
Catholicism,  342  ;  its  view  of  the 
Reformation,  340. 

Prayer,  its  relation  to  human  re¬ 
sponsibility,  74. 

Prescription,  limits  of  argument 
from,  2. 

Priscillian,  his  execution,  184. 

Progress  not  limited  to  advance  in 
knowledge,  168  ;  standard  of,  373. 

Property  Tax,  when  first  imposed  in 
England,  306. 

Prophecy,  historical  character  of,  as 
evidence,  139 ;  fulfilled  in  the 
progress  of  Christianity,  140. 

Protestant,  origin  of  name,  334. 

Protestantism,  its  defect,  200 ;  its 
true  function,  200 ;  asserted  to 
have  made  no  converts,  201 ;  its 
duty  of  toleration,  202 ;  a  gua¬ 
rantee  of  permanence,  354. 

Providence,  theory  of,  essential  to 
Christianity,  113;  general  and 
special,  123  ;  sphere  of,  125  ;  mis¬ 
interpretations  of,  132. 

R. 

Rationalism  views  Religion  as  a 
phase  of  morality,  256  ;  this  error 
examined,  257  ;  not  a  consequence 
of  the  Reformation,  352  ;  defined, 
353. 


Reformation  restored  the  individual 
influence  of  Christianity,  11;  and 
of  the  Bible,  41 ;  not  a  mere  moral 
protest,  168,326, 327 ;  its  theology 
inductive,  210;  in  itself  a  test 
of  the  truth  of  Christianity,  321 ; 
spontaneous,  322 ;  not  a  result 
of  improved  knowledge,  323 ;  its 
defects,  323  ;  its  practical  changes 
rested  on  renewed  doctrines,  324 ; 
date  of  its  commencement,  325 ; 
not  indefinite,  331 ;  or  negative, 
332 ;  restored  the  balance  of  doc¬ 
trines,  333 ;  its  permanent  effects, 
334 ;  how  a  protest,  334 ;  Roman 
and  Positivist  views  of,  340 ;  Ra¬ 
tionalistic  view  of,  341 ;  still  in 
progress,  343 ;  introduced  new 
elements  of  progress,  345. 

Reformed  Churches,  their  missionary 
efforts,  369  ;  and  prospects,  372. 

Religion,  an  element  in  civilization, 
149 ;  its  changes  not  due  to  in¬ 
tellectual  progress,  150;  its  true 
function,  156  ;  not  a  mode  of  pro¬ 
claiming  morality,  161 ;  influences 
the  advance  of  morals,  168 ;  its 
tacit  force,  174;  deals  with  spi¬ 
ritual  truth,  195 ;  not  reaction¬ 
ary  as  to  secular  knowledge,  196  ; 
how  related  to  Natural  Science, 
225 ;  independent  of  advances  in 
knowledge,  236 ;  the  Science  of 
the  Soul,  223;  a  necessity  of 
human  nature,  241 ;  its  vital 
forces,  253 ;  necessary  elements, 
255 ;  a  vehicle  of  Revelation,  256  ; 
assumes  Mysteries,  256 ;  test  of 
its  success,  258  ;  how  far  a  moral 
one,  259 ;  its  periodicity  of  re¬ 
vival,  344;  foremost  in  political 
reforms,  352. 

Religion  of  Nature,  its  ambiguities, 
161. 

Religions  perishable,  2 ;  historical 
sequence  of,  144. 

Religious  Disabilities,  removal  of, 
357. 

Religious  Wars,  true  character  of, 
183. 

Revelation,  how  far  a  natural  pro¬ 
cess,  47. 

O 

jJ 


c 


386 


INDEX. 


Ritual,  its  influence  in  conversion, 
289. 

Roman  Empire,  its  condition  at  tlie 
coming  of  Christ,  264;  why  not 
saved  by  Christianity,  278 ;  effect 
of  its  extinction  on  Christianity, 
283. 

Roman  Catholicism,  its  present 
danger,  202,  354;  its  missionary 
zeal,  367  ;  and  prospects,  372. 

Royal  Society  founded  partly  by 
Churchmen,  355. 

S. 

Saints,  Intercession  of,  general  in 
Middle  Ages,  319. 

Salmasius,  his  defence  of  usury,  187. 

Salvian,  his  estimate  of  Christian 
declension,  '279. 

Sanctuary,  Right  of,  its  spiritual 
character,  290. 

Scepticism  admissible  as  to  religious 
evidence,  209 ;  not  formidable 
to  Religion,  239 ;  whether  a  re¬ 
sult  of  the  Reformation,  353 ;  its 
peril  to  the  Church  of  Rome, 
354. 

Scholasticism,  its  effects,  301. 

Schools,  how  far  due  to  Christianity, 
271 ;  and  to  the  Reformation,  347. 

Science,  how  far  predictive,  130 ;  in 
what  respects  ineffectual  to  human 
happiness,  154 ;  theories  as  to  its 
relations  to  Religion,  191,  192 ; 
their  assumed  incompatibility, 
193  ;  their  meeting-joints,  243. 

Scripture,  its  authority,  38;  its  power 
of  prolonging  personal  influence, 
39 ;  this  an  element  in  the  per¬ 
petuity  of  the  religion,  40;  erro¬ 
neous  interpretations  of,  186  ;  its 
relation  to  the  Reformation,  41, 
329. 

Secularization  not  necessarily  un¬ 
favourable  to  Christianity,  357, 
360. 

Sensation,  fallacies  of,  102. 

Serfdom,  how  far  extinguished  by 
Christianity,  310. 

Slavery,  emancipation  of,  by  Chris¬ 
tianity,  72,  271. 


Soul,  proof  of  its  existence  induc¬ 
tive,  226;  its  immortality,  whe¬ 
ther  recognized  at  the  coming  of 
Christ,  227. 

Spinoza,  his  view  of  Providence, 

117. 

Spirit,  denial  of  its  existence  sub¬ 
versive  of  all  Religion,  225. 

State,  The,  duty  of,  in  propagating 
truth,  358. 

Statistics,  defective  as  a  means  of 
showing  the  operation  of  the  Will, 
103,  104. 

Stoicism,  its  incapacity  as  a  system 
of  religion,  237  ;  its  sources,  264. 
Suicide  advocated  by  heathen  philo¬ 
sophy,  377 ;  its  true  remedy  in 
Christianity,  ib. 

T. 

Temporal  Power  clearly  distin¬ 
guished  in  medieval  Christianity, 
292. 

Teutonic  character,  309,  312  ;  Chris¬ 
tianity,  372. 

Theism,  its  relation  to  Christianity, 
70. 

Theology  a  science  of  historical  criti¬ 
cism,  211 ;  its  method  how  far 
deductive,  215,  216 ;  whether 
stationary,  218;  or  progressive, 
219 ;  rashly  assumed  to  be  op¬ 
posed  to  induction  and  verifica¬ 
tion,  207 ;  and  to  science,  208 ; 
includes  both  primary  and  in¬ 
ferred  truths,  210;  commence¬ 
ment  of,  as  a  science,  318. 

Time,  a  test  of  truth,  17  ;  in  what 
sense  an  agent,  18. 

Toleration,  its  fundamental  prin¬ 
ciple,  203 ;  neglected  by  the  Re¬ 
formers,  351,  355  ;  not  a  cause  of 
Rationalism,  352,  354 ;  advocated 
by  the  Fathers  before  Constan¬ 
tine,  356. 

Tradition,  Christian  primitive,  its 
relation  to  Scripture,  38. 

Truce  of  God  distinguished  from 
“  Peace  of  God,”  190. 

Truth  progresses  slowly  but  inevi¬ 
tably,  9  ;  how  far  an  attribute  of 
institutions,  13. 


INDEX.  387 


U. 

Ulphilas,  the  missionary  of  the 
Goths,  286. 

Unity,  present  need  of,  12  ;  the  ulti¬ 
mate  prospect  of  Christianity, 
200. 

V. 

Veddahs  destitute  of  a  belief  in 
God,  68. 

Verification  admissible  in  religious 
experience,  214,  219. 

W. 

War,  increasing  rarity  of,  due  in 
part  to  Christianity,  190. 


Wealth,  increase  of,  no  guarantee 
for  real  advance,  155. 

Will  of  man  essentially  motive,  78  ; 
homogeneous  with  the  Divine,  99  ; 
conditioned  in  action,  100 ;  spiri¬ 
tual  character  of,  229. 

Women,  position  of,  in  medieval  so¬ 
ciety,  310;  how  far  elevated  by 
Christianity,  310. 

Wonder,  how  an  element  in  Eeligion, 
321. 

X. 

Xavier,  his  character  and  death, 
368,  370. 


LONDON  : 

PRINTED  BY  WILLIAM  CLOTVES  AND  SONS,  STAMFORD  STREET 
AND  ClIARING  CROSS. 


* 


1° 


